2:32 am
October 14, 2008
Less knowledgeable people might not differentiate between Bell and Speakout, and if they see discussion about tethering with Bell is condoned here, they might think that discussion about tethering with Speakout is also allowed.
As I said in your PM, this is a SpeakOut site, and this thread was originally started to discuss if you can use an iPhone 4S with SpeakOut, then it was hijacked by a few people into discussion about Bell. If you want to discuss Bell, and tethering with Bell, choose a site dedicated to that provider.
6:16 am
December 30, 2010
As I said, make the fact clear, you are the moderator, do whatever you want to the forum. Don't twist facts though.
And didn't I say that it is perfectly ok to say BELL IS OT and should not be discussed here, but don't randomly throw out reasons that is irrelavant and change along the course.
I show BOTH rules and didn't see violations. show me the violations.
6:42 am
October 25, 2011
8:22 am
October 25, 2011
12:46 pm
October 14, 2008
I was clear. Here's the rules. No talk about tethering, regardless of provider. This is just to keep it safe, and not make people think that if there are discussions about tethering with Bell, some people might assume talking about tethering with SpeakOut is ok here as well. It is not.
If you would like to discuss tethering with Bell, and all things related to Bell, there are plenty of sites dedicated to that provider. Sign up on one of those sites. This is a site dedicated to SpeakOut. I'm not saying Bell is off topic totally on this site, but don't hijack a thread that was started to discuss using an iPhone 4S with SpeakOut. Start your own thread in the "Other Carriers" forum if you would like to discuss Bell.
12:59 pm
December 30, 2010
You better change your wording of your rule about tethering then. The wording there obviously is not what you now said 'regardless of provider'. I can understand your rationale of this new interpretation, but that is not what your stated rule is communicating.
As I have repeated, it is ok to say 'don't hijack' which is also your rule and I am perfectly fine. But calling in the wrong rule and shout(which IMO actually against your other rule of give people the benefit of doubt, rule 2) is plain wrong and very rude.
EDIT:
in fact the wording there is communicating 'don't discuss how to circumvent and discuss on how to use SO UMB for tethering'. So remove all those explanation and just make it simple 'the word tethering is forbidden in this forum, regardless of context' which is what you want to say.
1:33 pm
October 14, 2008
I changed the wording yesterday.
Also, it never said "don't discuss how to circumvent and discuss on how to use SO UMB for tethering" It just says "Do not ask how you can circumvent SpeakOut's rules." That statement is not only about tethering, but against anything that violates SpeakOut's terms and conditions.
As for my other post, I stand by what I said. Too many people have come to this site who post away, and have never read the rules here, or the rules on the official site. If you are a customer of SpeakOut, you should make yourself very familiar with their 'Terms' page on the official site, as it is the law when accessing their service. Every forum based site has rules, including this one.
1:42 pm
December 30, 2010
this is the old rule
10. Do not ask how you can circumvent SpeakOut's rules. That goes with any device, or computer. DO NOT ASK ABOUT TETHERING, and similar items. SpeakOut only supports their devices, and we should not be discussing on how to "bend the rules". We should support SpeakOut because we know they are the best value in wireless, or none of us would be here. If you have any questions about legalities, consult the official SpeakOut site. Any more threads/posts about tethering, cloning sim cards, using the phone just as a modem, or how to bend the rules, will be deleted immediately, and possible banning of the people involved.
If anyone can interpret that as 'tethering and similar terms are forbidden, regardless of context', I am interested to know how they get to that conclusion.
Even your revised one is still confusing. My advice is just make it simpler but that is up to you. As it no longer affect me now that you tell me what is really in your mind(not what your rule is communicating though, it is still implicating something but better than the above).
I have no issue with your rationale nor the don't hijack so you can stand by that. But do read your rule 2 or you can change it to say 'moderator doesn't need this rule' if by stand by you also mean the shout.
EDIT:
BTW, watch out about the term 'law' as only parliament/province legislature/city council can make up 'laws' in this country. Speakout's are terms of use(or contract terms which is governed by contract law), not law.
6:19 pm
October 14, 2008
6:55 pm
December 30, 2010
4:39 am
April 22, 2009