>having rules on an alt board
How about you get rid of them. It suits /am/ just fine.

>>288
>getting anal about 3 rules

as much as I like /am/, this isn't /am/. it ain't all that bad tho, atleast if you make an ea thread, It won't get deleted

Post your face when this "hurr durr all other vidya boards are rulecucks" shithole has had more discussion about rules than anywhere else.

these read more like a guidelines than rules

...I guess you're making some progress... maybe?

Why can't you see that you shouldn't be aiming at having fewer rules. You're missing the point. Rules don't work, they don't solve the issues you're trying to use them against.
And most importantly rules cannot produce better content.

As for spam consider the following:
"No spam" as a written rule is retarded in every sense.
It has been used to ban things that don't even resemble spam in the past.
Second, if we assume that we all agree on what spam means, which is flooding, then it's assumed by anyone with a brain that the rule applies to all boards unless the board is called /intl/.
Third, saying you will ban spammers does nothing, because the spammers in question don't care about being banned in your board and will spam anyways.

When a BO adds "no spam" as a written rule, you can tell he has no idea what he's doing.

>>292
does having 3 (two technically) bother you?

>>294
*rules

>>294
You're thinking about it wrong way.
The "no spam" rule is useless as explained above.

The on-topic rule is harmful. No one is qualified to act as a quality control on an imageboard, no one besides Anonymous themselves. Anonymous that relinquishes his right to self moderate ends up as whiny, dull, mod reliant faggot.

Let's say OP wants to talk about movies of David Lynch. He'll post on here but either he won't get any replies or they will be offtopic (or in case of /v/ tier boards pathetic whines) so OP will realise video game board might not be the place to find people that would like to talk about topic he's interested in. In case he's retarded he'll attempt to start a thread couple times more but the community will act roughly the same - disinterested.

Where are your rules now?

>>303
if no rules are useless than what's the harm in having them? think about that brainbuster.

>>303
wait if he wants to talk about a movie, he can go or create a movie board now if the anon wants to talk about the movie game, that would be allowed.

movies aren't games cholo.

>>304
*if rules

>>304
stop triggering me.

>>304
Why would I even need to explain that on what was once a part of freeposting federation? They're useless for what they're advertised to do. They're useful for justifying power abuse.

>>308
I will never abuse my power.

>>310
this you can be sure

>>311
I am a gentle giant. I forgot I got dubs in my last post.

>>310
>>311
>>312
is that why you nuked the board that one time?

>rules
Lmao /vvv/ a shit

>>>/vidya/ is where it's at

>>314
Why do you faggots have such a poor naming sense.
Both /vvv/ and /vidya/
they're utterly unpunnable

>>315
V-V-V-VIRGIN(s)

Not good enough?
>>308
Wasn't it Moots that it didn't work, and /pol/'s rulecuckery just led to political stagnation.
Doubly so, didn't Stormfags simply spawn from making nazism a meme?

>>317
tiple/v/irgins

>>324
Very venomous virgins.

we on top of /v/ fuccbois

:D

so this board dead?

>>718
Kinda.

Anyway might as well advertise for a vidya board for playing vidya: >>>/pc/