General posting guidelines

[John Kennett]

I want to keep the number of rules and regulations here to an absolute minimum, and so far there hasn't been any need to have any formal rules. For the vast majority of the time the RIBnet forums run smoothly without any need for moderation, but there have recently been a few requests for guidelines for acceptable posting.

So, for the record, this is what is expected:

Post selectively
Consider whether each message you post is actually worth posting. This does not mean that every post has to be dead-pan serious, but that a balance needs to be struck. Having a high post-count doesn't necessarily mean you have a lot to say!

Write in English
RIBnet is an English language site. Ocasional asides in other languages aren't a problem, but are generally unhelpful for most of the other users. You're not going to be marked for spelling and grammar (although you can spell check your messages now!), but txt spk isn't appreciated.

Make sure that what you post is correct
If you make a statement of fact, be prepared to back it up with some evidence. If you are stating an opinion, please make this clear and be prepared for others to disagree with you. Whatever happens, please remain calm and polite at all times.

Be courteous
RIBnet is a friendly group of like minded people. If someone posts something that you disagree with, then by all means say so but do it politely and rationally. It is also helpful to say why you disagree. If you have to resort to abuse then you have clearly lost the argument! Personal attacks and abuse will not be tolerated and may lead to a suspension of posting rights, or in extreme cases an outright ban. Threats of physical violence, either explicit or implied, are not acceptable on RIBnet.

Don't upload irrelevant attachments
Image attachments are welcome where they are interesting or useful. Generic pictures and clip art do not fall into either category.

Use the archive
There is a massive archive of information in the RIBnet forums, and it is all searchable. If you have a question please take the time to search the archive and read previous discssions on the subject before you post.

Use the Private Message system
Please avoid using the forums for personal conversations or two-way discussions that will only be of interest to the two people taking part. The PM system is there for you to use!

This lot is, I think, just common sense. If you think anything should be changed, added or deleted then please let me know and I'll consider it.

There are also guidelines for commercial posting for any trade related posts.


John

[Keith Hart]

BUMASTUS:

Genus of trilobites (extinct arthropods) found in Europe and North America as fossils in rocks of Ordovican to Silurian age (between 500,000,000 and 395,000,000 years old). Bumastus is very distinctive in form; the head and tail regions are smooth and very large and have fused segments. Its elliptical body is flat on the bottom; the back and sides are strongly concave and arched. Bumastus was a bottom-dwelling form.

I am prepared to back up the above facts with written evidence.

Keith (Encyclopedia Britanica) Hart

[Richard B]

Originally Posted by Keith Hart

BUMASTUS:
fossils in rocks of Ordovican to Silurian age (between 500,000,000 and 395,000,000 years old).

Mr Hart, likeminded and friendly person, I do beg to differ, but in a polite and rational manner!

I shall now helpfully state why I disagree. As Google is my friend, I have done a search using that engine, and discovered that Encyclopaedia Britannica states the following:

"fossils in rocks of Ordovician to Silurian age (between 408 and 505 million years old)".

I shall not resort to abuse otherwise I will lose this argument.

I attempted a search on RIBnet but that did not produce any useful results.

I did consider sending you a PM but did not wish any other members to be misled by your error.

[Ribald]

Be very carefull lads otherwise you could be "Manosed"

[John Kennett]

Originally Posted by John Kennett

Consider whether each message you post is actually worth posting.

I've just won £10 'cos I bet myself that Keith Hart would be the first in with a facetious comment

If only I had gone for the accumulator with Richard in second place . . .

John

[Richard B]

I couldn't have done it without Keith

[Mark Halliday]

Originally Posted by John Kennett

I've just won £10 'cos I bet myself that Keith Hart would be the first in with a facetious comment

John

Would it be more accurate to say you have also lost £10?

[John Kennett]

I prefer not to look at it that way!

John

[jwalker]

Nutters.

[Rogue Wave]

Originally Posted by Ribald

Be very carefull lads otherwise you could be "Manosed"

What's that made to drink MEKP


now pack to the thread I don't think you should tell fibs (seriously )