Revised Rules and Code of Conduct

Very well said, Qc.

Pliorius,

YC is a private forum. It has a head Administrator/Owner (chopin) who is like the "president". YC has it's own politics... I will use the example of a country. The USA has rules or laws which are lax in comparison to other countries of the world. Some other countries have much more stringent rules. These rules are created based on how the leader would like the place to be run. It would not be wise for a citizen of the USA to go to another country expecting the same rules to apply. YC is the same, but of course on a much smaller scale. I appologize if you do not appreciate our new policy, however, we created it for a reason. We based our new rules on observations made throughout the forum of our current problems. The new rules were created as what we hope will become solutions to the problems. As Administrators (YC's politicians) we have the right to create rules for the domain as we see fit, it has nothing to do with "power". We want this place to become a positive, constructive environment for people who share the same passion for music and want to be a part of a community.

Jen FTW! She just earned her Admin stripes there. Well done! :thumbsup:

I agree with what most of juji says, except this:

I think what would be a great idea would be to somehow be able to stop a person from posting in a particular thread. If we had a function where all the members would be able to vote which member(s) should not take part in the conversation, and that number reaches a certain standard, then that member should be disallowed from taking part in that discussion.

which could potentially be used as a means of excluding people with unpopular opinions from a discussion. Legal, or course, but not productive.

I'm not concerned about the profanity or sexual content rules beyond the points brought up about pieces like that of Nikolas. I don't use profanity, so I should be fine, and people really should start considering others and their concerns more.

These new rules just seem the reorient the course and the purpose of the forum, to make it more family-friendly - which, inevitably, some will like and some will dislike. I'm just going to wait for a while and see how it turns out.

*takes a bow* :happy:

Not up on the internet "lingo"... what the heck is FTW? :P

*takes a bow* :happy:

Not up on the internet "lingo"... what the heck is FTW? :P

FTW = "For the win", an internet expression of enthusiasm for the particular topic or person that precedes.

These new rules just seem the reorient the course and the purpose of the forum, to make it more family-friendly - which, inevitably, some will like and some will dislike. I'm just going to wait for a while and see how it turns out.

Good call! Prudence is best IMHO.*

*for Jen, that's "in my humble opinion." :thumbsup:

ahh good to know :D Thanks!

no, there's no such thing as 'private forum', it's a contradiction. forum is a place (be it real or virtual) that is defined as a public meeting or assembly for open discussion. if not for the fact/event/decision (mainly originating in ancient Athenes) of accepting that human beings can be rational, autonomous and free, there would have never ever been such thing as 'forums'. if you decide to create one, you, implicitly accept such things as freedom, rationality and autonomity. moreover, as i said, no law can even pretend to be legitimate if it does not automatically assume that people are equal and can have their rights (stated, organised and defended). any other creation of 'laws' is autocrat, violent and not right and as such is not even a law (it bears no justice), but only a sign of power.

again, i was not arguing about the rules and what not.

i said that, by definition and implication, no law, forum or any other political phenomenon is legitimate and free (and as thus being a source of privacy as it is understood in democtratic situations), and, of course, any responsibility against such 'laws' is based on fear, lie and power games, but not autonomous and rational choice.

as for U.S.A type analogy, it doesn't fit here, for it is relative to the understanding of powers, but not freedom and autonomity of individual. actually, the case is quite contrary due to the fact that U.S.A has shown million times that they do not respect the laws of other countries.

and, i'm not saying that new rules are bad or so, all i'm saying that passing these rules without open discussion is conservative, reactionist, irrational and such remind me of a power driven state of the world, but not (at least an attempt) at democracy, politics (which is a result of freedom and rationality, as concieved in classic times of Athenes and has the best expression in speech of Pericles, but not power).

and, moreover, being rational and autonomous creature, i cannot stand masking of power as a source of poltical (public) life.

plus, if you deny the freedom of speech (which is freedom to defend one's beliefs and enter a rational discussion), you deny the least possible good thing internet could bring to humanity.

*eliminates all the "law" stuff that makes you sound like a stupid version of James Madison. I mean, really!*

and, i'm not saying that new rules are bad or so, all i'm saying that passing these rules without open discussion is conservative, reactionist, irrational and such remind me of a power driven state of the world, but not (at least an attempt) at democracy, politics (which is a result of freedom and rationality, as concieved in classic times of Athenes and has the best expression in speech of Pericles, but not power).

Conservative? No. Espeically not. And if you think so, you have no idea what it means to be a conservative.

Reactionaist? No. Lol actually. The new rules are made to promote change to the forum. Am I missing something?

Irrational? No. See above.

Is this forum a Democracy? No. The people do not authoritatively allocate power, the administrators do.

Conservative? No. Espeically not. And if you think so, you have no idea what it means to be a conservative.

Reactionaist? No. Lol actually. The new rules are made to promote change to the forum. Am I missing something?

Irrational? No. See above.

Is this forum a Democracy? No. The people do not authoritatively allocate power, the administrators do.

Reactionist is not the one who doesn't act (but: re-act), but the one whose acts conserve (and thus - conservative) power. Any passing of rules and laws without even trying to discuss it is reactionist and conservative. Especially, when you try to rule such things as freedom of speech.

Forum is, by definition, a democratic place. Of course, it isn't democracy as it is born in democracy and of freedom and rational dicussion.

forum is a place (be it real or virtual) that is defined as a public meeting or assembly for open discussion.

"a meeting to discuss matters of general interest"

or

"an Internet discussion group for participants with common interests"

Nowhere in those two definitions is there an implication that anyone outside of those involved or invited are able to share their opinions.

When registering with YC, you specifically agreed to abide by its rules as a private forum. That is one of the main reasons you have to register. A truly 'public' forum would not require registration.

Again, this site exists due to the owners paying for and making it available. They are allowing you to be a member on the condition you follow the rules, which by registering, you have already agreed to do.

No, that's not quite true. The applicable definition of a "forum" is:

"a meeting to discuss matters of general interest"

or

"an Internet discussion group for participants with common interests"

Nowhere in those two definitions is there an implication that anyone outside of those involved or invited are able to share their opinions.

When registering with YC, you specifically agreed to abide by its rules as a private forum. That is one of the main reasons you have to register. A truly 'public' forum would not require registration.

Again, this site exists due to the owners paying for and making it available. They are allowing you to be a member on the condition you follow the rules, which by registering, you have already agreed to do.

For better understanding of what is forum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_(Roman).

Registration in forums is needed to prevent insults, intellectual terrorism and other things that can be regarded as antipolitical and not welcome in the public life (because they degrade the idea of publicity in the first place!)

The idea of private forum is contradictory if it is not orientated to publicity and openess, actually it completely makes no sense, because rules are created only when people interact with each other in an open and public space. I already argued that.

By registering i agree to follow the rules, but at the same time the rules must not devalue my rights and freedom, and ability to participate regarding it's organizing. If you suddenly change the rules (and i was registered before, accepting the previous rules), you put me in very unconvienient situation - you already make me participate in things i may have not agreed earlier. To be correct and right, before changing the rules, all members must be informed and possibly have a discussion or debate, or, in a dictatorship manner, just asked to leave before the law has been legitimated if they do not agree, not post factum.

And, once again, i argued that forum is a public meeting in the first place, and as such must be open to all it's participants if they want to engage (in it). Without this principle the forum becomes a court palace for the chosen ones.

These rules are free to be changed at any time, at the owner's discretion.

The above quote is something you need to remember. If you are an advertiser with Google, you would know that they change their terms of service all the time. And if you do not obey their TOS, they can kick you out without any reason whatsoever. Of course, as a courtesy, they should update you when they change their TOS, and they do. We did the same thing just now, despite the fact that you entered this forum agreeing to the first set of rules.

You don't know how many times I have been accused of dictatorship, but do I in any way affect the way you live, or force you to be here? On the other hand, imagine I run a business. Don't I reserve the right to determine someone's salary? Don't I have the right to doc pay for misbehavior? Don't I have the right to reward someone for good work?

The answers are yes, because YC, or any private company or entity only exist because of someone else's ability to maintain its existence. I can close down YC today if I wanted to, and I do not have to give any reason for closing it down. I don't owe anyone anything, just like you don't owe anyone anything.

I realize I sound a little harsh, but I am just trying to make a point. The only reason for these newly imposed rules are to benefit YOU, and the whole community. I am trying to protect Young Composers the best I can, because I want YOUR experience here to be positive! And if you think I am a dictator, note that I was the one who came up with the new rule to eliminate the perma ban. I realized that holding someone accountable for what they did last year, wasn't the best method, and goes against my agenda here. I want everyone who has a love for music composition to have a "home". And if you were disobedient in the past, we will give you chances to learn to use YC as a resource because we want you here, and we want you to learn from others!

This is the reason why I pay money to keep this site up, without earning a cent. Not a penny. I want you guys to have a home for this type of music, and the unnecessary hate speech, cursing, brawls make me upset....because this is not the reason why I fund YC.

Just gunna say this: To anyone who doesn't like the changes, give up now. I've been through this a few times already. This isn't up for discussion, even if you get the impression that it is, it isn't, it's set in stone, move on, live with it or go the route so many of us have gone before, you'll be in good company.

For better understanding of what is forum Forum (Roman) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

I think you really need to re-read your own sources.

You posted a link to a definition of a physical place, called a forum.

let me offer you a more appropriate link, one to a definition of an INTERNET forum.

Here you will find that your conception of what an Internet Forum is, is in fact, in error.

The above quote is something you need to remember. If you are an advertiser with Google, you would know that they change their terms of service all the time. And if you do not obey their TOS, they can kick you out without any reason whatsoever. Of course, as a courtesy, they should update you when they change their TOS, and they do. We did the same thing just now, despite the fact that you entered this forum agreeing to the first set of rules.

You don't know how many times I have been accused of dictatorship, but do I in any way affect the way you live, or force you to be here? On the other hand, imagine I run a business. Don't I reserve the right to determine someone's salary? Don't I have the right to doc pay for misbehavior? Don't I have the right to reward someone for good work?

The answers are yes, because YC, or any private company or entity only exist because of someone else's ability to maintain its existence. I can close down YC today if I wanted to, and I do not have to give any reason for closing it down. I don't owe anyone anything, just like you don't owe anyone anything.

I realize I sound a little harsh, but I am just trying to make a point. The only reason for these newly imposed rules are to benefit YOU, and the whole community. I am trying to protect Young Composers the best I can, because I want YOUR experience here to be positive! And if you think I am a dictator, note that I was the one who came up with the new rule to eliminate the perma ban. I realized that holding someone accountable for what they did last year, wasn't the best method, and goes against my agenda here. I want everyone who has a love for music composition to have a "home". And if you were disobedient in the past, we will give you chances to learn to use YC as a resource because we want you here, and we want you to learn from others!

This is the reason why I pay money to keep this site up, without earning a cent. Not a penny. I want you guys to have a home for this type of music, and the unnecessary hate speech, cursing, brawls make me upset....because this is not the reason why I fund YC.

chopin, i completely understand you and gives you high five for it, and would treat you with tons of whisky and friendship anytime if not for the fact that its too far and i'm half broke.

so, to point it again, i was not arguing the rules, laws and whatever.

I've been requested to repost my question about uploading sites more clearly....

I know members can upload MP3 files in the "Upload Your Compositions for Analysis or Feedback" section, but I was talking more about other sections like:

"Discussion > Composer's Headquarters " or

"Discussion > Performance"

If I want to show to the members some "Sound Recording (MP3)" to explain or describe an idea or comment, I must Upload the files in some server outside YC, and post the link saying "go there, and listen" ... (because you can only attach gif jpeg jpg mid midi mus nwc pdf png rtf sib txt xml and 3 MB tops)

There are servers like "Rapidshare, Depositfiles etc, etc" to upload files but I want others more propper for "go and listen"

I've noticed viewing other pieces posts that some members of the site use sites that have rather horrid attributes (pop-ups, spyware, etc.)

What I want to know is this:

Where can I upload an MP3 file easily, so others may go and listen (without they have to create an account in that website for listen) and have no problems sush as, bad sound quality, too slow streaming, and other things like jawoodruff says, Pop-up, Spyware etc....

....a safe, serious, site.

I hope I made myself clear.

I think you really need to re-read your own sources.

You posted a link to a definition of a physical place, called a forum.

let me offer you a more appropriate link, one to a definition of an INTERNET forum.

Here you will find that your conception of what an Internet Forum is, is in fact, in error.

Yessir.

I have actually BEEN TO a physical forum. A police forum. Way different from YC. Way more rules than YC. Way more restrictive than YC.

So if Perma-bans are no longer permanent, will those who were permabanned in the past be notified of this change?

We managed to contact one so far - Nico.

I guess it's a good time to say this, nico may be allowed back, but he has been for a while *whistles*.

Where is the shoutbox?

^^It's been taking down because of people posting Russian obscenities.

I think the new rules seem rather good but I also think that it could be profitable to YC if there was some kind of a constitution for want of a better word. Arguably it would just be a publicity stunt but it would perhaps provide a sense of cohesion to what could otherwise be a very disparate forum.

YC, to me, is one of the best forums primarily because of the sense of community that the off topic section allows (just look at my post ratio :p) so while I would say keep the rules I think it would be good to illustrate the rights and responsibilities of the members and moderators as well.

Just my three-penny-worth!

Pliorius rather than debating the true 'correct' meaning and values of freedom of speech, I think we should use common sense. I don't think it is a good idea to allow people to belittle anybody who's opinion differs from their own. This has happened many times and has ruined potentially interesting and informative discussion.

I think this is great! YC will once again be a place of (at least relative) peace! : ) This will be great.

Pliorius rather than debating the true 'correct' meaning and values of freedom of speech, I think we should use common sense. I don't think it is a good idea to allow people to belittle anybody who's opinion differs from their own. This has happened many times and has ruined potentially interesting and informative discussion.

as if 'stricter' (based on wrong procedure of legitimation) rules don't ruin potential discussions...

like the one i tried to have here.

but now, i really don't care anymore.

Go YC!