Seriously....

[Каие]

....why was this thread closed?

Alright, I've had enough. You're not fooling anyone.

Yes, it is a farce. And I'm saying this through my capacity as a Citizen, not as the Curator. It's terribly obvious, considering that the proposer of this bill had also proposed a Babe Thread.

In essence this thread was closed because.... you doubted the proposing member's motives for the bill since he previously proposed a babe thread, which contradicts the aim of his new proposal?

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

Apparently accusing proposers of evil intent and suppressing all discussion on the subject is a new Curatorial duty. I wonder why weren't we notified of this Constitutional change?

I even had 3 named supporters... anyway, I don't particularly care. It wouldn't have added anything creative to the site just like the gazillions of other unimportant bills recently tabled for discussion.

[Каие]

I think it was silly, you were making a point, putting across a point.... but just don;t think it should have been closed for a reason like that.

Not that it matters, the Curia doesn't really matter.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Oh, come now.

[Каие]

I don't remember it being a bad thing or illegal all of a sudden to try and make a serious point.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

I think it was silly, you were making a point, putting across a point.... but just don;t think it should have been closed for a reason like that.

You must be joking. I can tell it by the look of your eyes.

[Astaroth]

It was never a serious proposal but rather a sarcastic complaint about the current ToS. Such things do not belong into the Prothalamos. Furthermore, the topic degenerated quickly and several posts had to be deleted.

The Curator was perfectly within his remit to close it.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

How can you tell I wasn't being serious? The burden of proof is still on you, especially if you limit the freedom of speech in the Curia.

[Каие]

Never said he wasn't within his remit. Just questioning the intent.

[Astaroth]

How can you tell I wasn't being serious? The burden of proof is still on you, especially if you limit the freedom of speech in the Curia.

Almost the whole thread consisted of spam and a discussion about whether the current "Obscene Content" section of the ToS should be changed or not. Either way, such threads are not tolerated anywhere else on this site and I fail to see why the Prothalamos should be any different in this respect.

Never said he wasn't within his remit. Just questioning the intent.

The Prothalamos is meant for serious proposals. Complaints can be posted in the Q&S (and in the Curia main I guess), off-topic discussion belongs to the Thema Devia.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

Almost the whole thread consisted of spam and a discussion about whether the current "Obscene Content" section of the ToS should be changed or not. Either way, such threads are not tolerated anywhere else on this site and I fail to see why the Prothalamos should be any different in this respect.

That's your personal judgement on the quality of posts in the thread, not an evidence of me being "unserious" in my proposal.

So, in lack of evidence, you are saying that discussing the obscene content rule and proposing an amendment to said rule is "not tolerated" in this site. I wonder where is the server located? In Uzbekistan? Perhaps in Uganda?

[Astaroth]

That's your personal judgement on the quality of posts in the thread, not an evidence of me being "unserious" in my proposal.

So, in lack of evidence, you are saying that discussing the obscene content rule and proposing an amendment to said rule is "not tolerated" in this site. I wonder where is the server located? In Uzbekistan? Perhaps in Uganda?

I did not say that. My point is that spamming (and the topic was full of that) is not allowed. If you wish to complain about the obscene content rule, feel free to do so - in the appropriate forum.

Either way, the Prothalamos thread had degenerated and Soulghast was perfectly within his remit to close it. Therefore, I'm done with this thread now.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

I did not say that. My point is that spam threads are not allowed. If you wish to complain about the obscene content rule, feel free to do so - in the appropriate forum.

A few things to consider:
1. If you regard a post to be "spam", you should delete it, but not close the entire thread. *insert facepalm smiley here* There are a few spam (off-topic) posts made by moderators - why didn't you delete them? Also, based on your perception of what's "spam" and your standard of the logically subsequent action, why don't you go and close the curator debate thread?
2. I wasn't complaining, I was proposing an amendment to said rule.
3. The Curia is the appropriate forum for making such proposals. Check the forum description.

Either way, the thread had degenerated and Soulghast was perfectly within his remit to close it. Therefore, I'm done with this thread now.

So close this too, that way you don't have to face criticism at all.

[Каие]

The Prothalamos is meant for serious proposals.

It's meant for proposals. Full stop. You missed the point of PowerWizards thread. The Prothalmos threads are not just for proposing and that;s it... they're about discussion too. In this case the discussion was about the broader topic of what is considered ''modest''. The Curia currently has the right to try to make amends to site policy.

[Squid]

Except, as has been pointed out, it was quite clearly not meant as a proposal but a commentary on the obscene content part of the ToS, most likely because of the minor change that was made to it with the revised ToS just released.

[Каие]

As I said discussion is still allowed within the prothalmos on those kind of matters, no matter if it's a little unorthodox in approach.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

Squid, repeating an unproved statement will not make it true.

[Squid]

As I said discussion is still allowed within the prothalmos on those kind of matters, no matter if it's a little unorthodox in approach.

No the prothalamos is meant for proposals and the discussion thereof, not just any random discussions.

Squid, repeating an unproved statement will not make it true.

Given the posts are there for all to view, lets look at some of them:

I still think she's sexy. Don't care what anyone says.

Great screen PW.

Because the ToS' clauses on nudity, besides being awkwardly titillating in their own right, are ridiculous.

I've always hated it's clauses on nudity and "illegal activities".

SMOKING POT NORMAL AND ACCEPTABLE! <-technically that is in violation of the illegal activities clause of the ToS.

Support. Clavicles are a gateway area, you know what this will lead to. Belly buttons, calves, thighs, the progression is unescapable.

Support, I also support the banning of any skin. I mean look at this floozy here!
<pic removed>

Given peoples responses to your post and taking into account the timing of the proposal, so closely after the ToS changes being announced, and your previous attempt to have a babe thread, which would certainly have pictures with clavicles in them, taking the thread to be a comment on the obscene content is very obvious.

[Каие]

Squid, do you accept that the proposal in the OP could have changed in the aftermath of discussion>?

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

Given the posts are there for all to view, lets look at some of them:

I am not responsible for other people's posts as I am not able to access their accounts. I can be accounted for my own posts, not for others.

Given peoples responses to your post and taking into account the timing of the proposal, so closely after the ToS changes being announced,

The actuality of the recent ToS changes only indicate the seriousness of my proposal. I wished to carry on the changes in the spirit of progressive, 21th century ideas. I even commented that I'm glad displaying a penis or scrotum is now officially against the rules. The site is going in the right direction, instead of heading towards moral disintegration and lewdness.

and your previous attempt to have a babe thread, which would certainly have pictures with clavicles in them, taking the thread to be a comment on the obscene content is very obvious.

I see you didn't read my latest post in the closed thread. Here it is again:

"Can't people make up their minds? Recently I was convinced in a friendly discussion that seing collarbones through monitors can be dangerous to your personal development as a teenager."

Also, there's a difference between said proposals. Posting a babe isn't frivolous per se, however posting a girl who openly shows the upper part of her breast could lead to debauchery.