I seem to have a hazy recollection of some such rule, but can’t remember if it’s a general prohibition, or only on certain message boards that we’ve had inter-dimensional warfare with in the past, like the “flatbread house”, the eschatological board and the “bad weather board”.
F’rinstance, in this thread Learning Scots Gaelic , the bobdunsire board came up in discussion. I was going to post a link to a particular thread on that board, but then got this hazy thought that it was against SDMB rules, so I just discussed it without a link.
Could I get a clarification on this point? Don’t want to breach the rules, but in some extremely rare instances other boards may actually have more information on a particular point than is the case here (I know, shocking to contemplate :eek: ) and a link to another board may contribute to fighting ignorance.
Thanks.
As I understand it, linking to other sites that host message boards is fine - happens all the time - shouldn’t be any different to linking to any other content.
What definitely isn’t fine is inciting (deliberately or accidentally) a board war; if, say, someone has a question about lawnmowers that might be a bit esoteric for the SDMB, recommending that they visit the Lawns and Garden Tractors Online Forum should be fine (or I would certainly hope so), whereas posting a thread asking people to come and bolster your argument about electric lawnmowers there, would not.
IANAMod/Admin though
I’ll confirm Mangetout’s comments, though. Basically, it depends on circumstances whether a link to another board is appropriate – depends on the board, the topic, and the circs around the link.
And, of course, all links should be workplace-safe. (That means, many people sign on at work, and if they happen to click on a link, they should not have something potentially embarrassing in the workplace flashing on their screen. Instead, use an indirect, two-link step… that way, they don’t get to the embarrassing screen accidentally.)
IANAMod, but it’s been my understanding since shortly after I joined that context is everything. If anything is pejorative of another board as a board, it’s against the standard usage here. This goes squared and cubed in spades for anything that might instigate a board war. However, a mere reference to discussion elsewhere that does not put down that board, even if it might be negative against a given member of that board, is not considered wrong. I’ve linked to discussions on a number of boards that helped to clarify or amplify a discussion here, and even pitted a number of people who were taking a stance on another board which I differed with strongly, making clear that I was not complaining about the board itself but some of its members.
FWIW, if “the flatbread house” is what I think you mean by it, it had a longstanding good relationship with this board, with staff on either board members at the other. It was itself founded by people objecting to poor moderation of the I-believe-now-defunct “sinister buttock” board, with which this board had a New Years Eve encounter years ago, and seeking to provide an alternative.
Thanks for the clarification , CK, and for the comments, Mangetout and Polycarp. Glad to know it’s all tied to the prime directive: do not be a jerk about things.
Polycarp, I had a vague recollection of some unpleasantness with that board, after the “sinsiter buttock” fiasco. I must have been thinking of something else - thanks for that clarification as well.
It’s still there - albeit in a slightly different form in a slightly different location.