These are the ground rules of Fightingarts.com:
1. Trolling, profanity, personal attacks, and rude behavior will not be tolerated.
2. Please use the forums search function before submitting new topics.
3. If you have an issue with an individual contact a moderator. If you have a problem with a moderator contact another moderator and/or the site administrator.
4. If your topic belongs in a specific forum on this site, it may be moved by a moderator to a forum which has been deemed appropriate by the moderator.
5. Prohibited topics: The following areas of discussion are strictly prohibited; Religion, Sexuality, Politics, Racism, Nationalism.
6. Advertising: Advertising of any form is not allowed except in the form of members promoting personal MA events or seminars. If you wish to advertise on this site, please contact the webmaster.
7. Art bashing will not be allowed or tolerated. If you had a bad experience with a certain art, specify, but do not assume that all of the art is the same as what you experienced.
8. There are to be no "X vs. Y" threads on this forum, they are pointless and only lead to flame wars.
For number 5, if you are talking about the history of Aikido, it would be hard to do without talking about 'religion' or 'politics', so that is fine. What this rule is meant to combat is a dissmissive, disrespectful or derogatory language regarding someone's religious beliefs.
Also, keep in mind that for number 8, you are allowed to critise another art, as long as it is done so intellgently and somewhat objectively. What I don't want to see is "Aikido sucks because BJJ is better, lol." Nor do I want to see the reverse of that ("BJJ sucks because Aikido is better, lol.") If you see something wrong with Aikido or any other art, state it objectively, logically, and (most importantly) respectfully.
To these rules i would like to add the rule that Charles Mahan has in the swordarts forum:
9)When making assertions that go against the grain of common belief you may very well be required to provide proof to back those claims. Most long time members here are very forth coming about their training and background; you can expect to be to. Providing basic info about yourself will be required if you plan to "educate" others due to the number of young and impressionable members we have surfing the forum.
10) 'Time in' is not always the final word on an argument. If someone has less time in an art than you, it doesn't mean that their opinion is without merit. Debate their points based on the validity of the logic that surrounds them, not based on their experiance. Most especially, I will not tolerate a dismissive attitude to other members based solely on:
Although experiance can definately provide insight into an art, it is not the be all and end all. If experiance were the only criteria need to assess an art, scholars such as Donn Draeger would have found it impossible to write any of their texts.
All this being said, such things as technical questions about a specific technique (e.g. 'How does one perfrom nikkyo?') will always best be answered by those with actual experiance. Questions of training methodolgy do not fall into this catagory though, because in order to successfully answer them, we need opinions by both those inside and outside the art, so that it can be compared and contrasted.
If you violate a rule you will be warned twice. If you break that rule again, you will be banned.
Lastly, jokes and humour are great! Just keep it civil!
Edited by Ames (01/05/09 05:35 PM)