View Full Version : Suggestion: A slight change in the blog rules?

May 20th, 2011, 6:17 AM
Well this has actually been on my mind for a while now, and I didn't know whether to mention it because people would shun me for it. Then I thought, "eh, why not?" and now posting it. Anyway, it's more regarding this rule.

Avoid posting more than one blog entry in the same day.
So that others don't have to filter through several meaningless blog entries from the same person, try to post only one entry within the span of a day. If you're the most recent blogger, you should simply add more to your blog post rather than create a new entry.

Now I have no problem with following this rule, but I feel as if it could be somehow improved. I mean, in conjunction with the rule about editing your last blog post, if someone else got in a little after you, and it strikes midnight, then technically you're allowed to make another blog post, if it's for say within the time of 1/2 hour. What I propose is that maybe this particular rule should be changed, or added to as a time limit maybe? Instead of one blog in the span of a day, one blog in the span of 12-24 hours or something?

May 20th, 2011, 6:25 AM
I agree with the 12-24 hour idea.

Maybe not 24 hours though. That would kill Nica if we had that.

Maybe a rule that states 24 hours or 8 or so of other people's blogs later whichever is quicker.

May 20th, 2011, 6:29 AM
Maybe not 24 hours though. That would kill Nica if we had that.

What? Don't know what you're on about tbh, I've gone weeks w/o blogging.

Anyway, I kinda agree, since 12am can vary for different timezones, too, so people may think you created more than one blog in a day when really you didn't, since it was a different day for your timezone.

Either way, 24 hours would be fine, imo, but afterall, technically it's a suggestion, so if anything, it'd actually have to become a rule instead of just "avoid" and "try" - or change the wording up at least to show it is a rule. Then again, last I heard it was meant to be a suggestion, so if it's become a rule since then, that's even better.

au bon
May 20th, 2011, 7:11 AM
As Nica said, this isn't exactly a rule. Just a steer in the direction we don't want members to go with spamming the blogs. The only reason that it's there now is because there were tons of blogs coming out from some members within an hour of each other, so we needed a way to refrain from that happening. I don't agree with adding or modifying the current blog rules at all. In fact, apart from following common courtesy and respect towards the members when commenting and blogging, I don't think we should have blog rules at all. It's something most of the members who have it paid for, and they should use it the way they'd like. Especially since blogs are a form of expression that some people don't necessarily have otherwise. I don't agree with this suggestion.

May 20th, 2011, 7:24 AM
I know that blogs are the whole thing of expressing your views and stuff, but there has to be a limit to how much you can do. If someone does get right in before your blog post, and the next day passes over in a short amount of time, you really shouldn't be making a brand new blog post. Instead of making it a time limit, maybe just add to the day thing, and say that if the day tips over, that you have to wait a number of hours before you can post another one.

May 20th, 2011, 8:15 AM
I'm certainly opposed to this...especially since folks like me are prone to post multiple blog entries in the span of a day but do not regularly or frequently publish blog entries.

I facepalm and groan at crappy pointless blog entries as much as you might, if not more, but Nick is right. They donated or participated enough, and so it's their right. To be honest I strongly opposed the addition of the guideline we have in place now, but since it's just a guideline it's not worth complaining about because technically staff can't punish you for ignoring that one...they can only take action if you extremely disregard it to the point where you're SPAMMING.

Personally, I find bandwagoning blog entries like 30 days of X and other suddenly popular topics to blog about to be pure spam...unless they substantially wrote something more than a sentence or two. However I wouldn't support banning that because there are a few decent bloggers out there who actually add something to those topics.

Blogs are a good thing, they've brought PC together more and made it more lively as they are moderated now. They need no further moderation...and I'm sure that people found to severely abuse their blogs can be stripped of that right or infracted accordingly. Short of severe abuse with total disregard to the two ACTUAL blog rules we have, they're protected expression so long as you're following the main rules.

May 20th, 2011, 9:21 AM
I think most people realize that the rule is there moreso as a "don't post so much >:O" guideline than anything else. If you think this sort of thing is happening a lot, where people see that the date has changed over that and consider it a day change so they can post again, point it out with one of the hstaff. If it's happening a lot, sure, the rule change will probably be necessary, but until then, I don't mind keeping it more vague. A lot of people paid for their blogs and those payments are vital to keeping PC afloat, so you'll find a lot of us on staff give a lot of leeway for blog use. (Hence the very lax rules about them.)

But again, if you think people are abusing the wording of the rule too much, it can be changed. We just want to try it this way for a bit before we tighten the rule because all it's there for is to discourage people from making 3 blogs in 2 hours. The rule was never meant to be airtight unless we needed it for certain.