We are guests on this forum, of an owner who has chosen not to allow discussion of certain subjects. Chosen, as is his/her right as owner.

They have that right, and I don't question it. I just have never understood the reasoning behind exercising the right.

My own sense so far is that it's far easier to state and enforce a zero-tolerance policy, and that the automotive topics ban came along to get rid of a flood of grey area discussions on those topics. Just like any outright ban, it often looks silly but the advantages of a ban are still valid. Auto mod? Out. No thinking, no meetings to confer, no time spent mulling it over.

There are still plenty of grey-area discussions here, and they're handled on a case by case basis as far as I can tell. Members here are fairly acute at sniffing out dangerous projects.

I think it's reasonable for the owners to not want discussions here of overtly dangerous stuff like rail-guns, although I don't buy into the premise that this protects anyone. The automotive ban is just a hammer applied where applying a scalpel would be too time-consuming.

 

They have that right, and I don't question it. I just have never understood the reasoning behind exercising the right.

My own sense so far is that it's far easier to state and enforce a zero-tolerance policy, and that the automotive topics ban came along to get rid of a flood of grey area discussions on those topics. Just like any outright ban, it often looks silly but the advantages of a ban are still valid. Auto mod? Out. No thinking, no meetings to confer, no time spent mulling it over.

There are still plenty of grey-area discussions here, and they're handled on a case by case basis as far as I can tell. Members here are fairly acute at sniffing out dangerous projects.

I think it's reasonable for the owners to not want discussions here of overtly dangerous stuff like rail-guns, although I don't buy into the premise that this protects anyone. The automotive ban is just a hammer applied where applying a scalpel would be too time-consuming.

As I see it, this would be more or less the main explanation, except for the last sentence. It's not that it is time consuming.

Some people, me included, expect online fora to have Terms of Service shown publicly and them being complete and all-inclusive. That means that they should leave no-gray areas and serve as a compass for the moderators to use. They should be as complete as possible, considering that we are not law-men or laywers.
In the case of automotive topics, yes, the administration has chosen to play safe in fear of lawsuits and/or automotive accidents. Even if electronics have become an integral part of cars and bikes, it is not the same as with a blender or a flashlight. I hope we all agree that automotive machines deserve a more careful approach. The law-makers think the same, requiring insurance, license and warranties for anyone who owns a car, while not asking the same for a blender nor a flashlight.

In that aspect, recognising how complicated policing such topics can be, and realising that there are not hard facts or practices when it comes to cars, the administration, along with the moderation decided to do a blanket ban on automotive modifications; we are just not comfortable tryting to decide what is go and what is no. We cannot find any hard yet sensible rules to go by.
We decided to leave a bit of room for automotive repairs, thinking that restoring the vehicle to its original state, could at least limit the randomness of the process.

Personally, I would like automotive topics to be a free-for-all under a separate subforum, but it is not my decision to take.

 

The issue is NOT of breaking rules, the T&C of the forum. It's about changing the rule itself and making it more flexible.

If discussions on an open forum is taken as Gospel truth, the fault lies with the believer and not the members of the forum who have expressed their ideas.

But, then, Law is an ass.

Ramesh

 

I have observed that when two-lane roads are straightened, widened to four lanes, and have center turns lanes added, the speed limit usually goes down. From a safety standpoint, that makes absolutely no sense to me even though speed limits ostensibly exist to increase traffic safety.

To put a personal spin on the subject of banned topics, I find it ironic that criticism of certain religions and their beliefs, usually in the form of snide remarks, is allowed here, but serious discussion is not. Before someone reminds me that this is an electronics forum, let me hasten to add that I am referring primarily to the off-topic section.

Lots of things in life are like that to me: stupid rules that I am obliged to follow, "just because." Trying to change them is usually more frustrating than "just going along with the gag."