If you ask in the way indicated by your last sentence, no, that would not be a rules violation.
Where Reza ran afoul of the rules is that he basically did post the question and ask for answers.
If you ever have any question about whether a post would be appropriate or not, feel free to PM or e-mail one of the mods. That’s what we’re here for.
It doesn’t matter because even if you did post something that got someone warned in the past, if they like you, or it’s a new month or they’ve had their morning coffee, they’ll explain how it’s actually totally different.
+1.
I think it’d called Zotti’s Law: the arbitrariness of the ruling is directly proportional to the vehemence with which it is defended.
Please tell me this is another case of a guideline that’s nebulous, hard to narrowly define and unworkable to broadly define and enforce. That by now the reason for the closing is pretty clear to everyone (especially after some clarifying posts) and that there’s no actual immediate threat of a new(ish) heavy-handed rule descending on us. That most of the kvetching stems from the Board’s large debate motif, intense passion for analysis and residual echos from when moderation discussions were relegated to the Pit. That the hypotheticals are either reflecting pissy pedanticism or love of esoteric understaning of minutia.
I get paid to write books on development policy, often with a focus on climate change. I ask grammar and science questions with reckless abandon, and cannot imagine that my posting privileges (whether full or topic ban) are in any way threatened by the current discussion.
I’ve asked computer and software questions, and computers and software are what I do for a living.
Shhhhh…!
Don’t even think about asking any kayak questions.
Geez, am I the only one who agrees with the Mod’s decision?
I’d still like to know:
Putting aside the specifics about this poster, I’m genuinely curious about why it matters in the first place.
Homework for example - I can imagine individual posters telling someone “Look, I’m not going to do your homework for you. If you want help figuring it out show me what youv’e done so far” and others saying “Sure kid, the answer is 532, cheers” - in either case why does the board administration care about it? Is it a question of scholastic ethics, legal liability, or what?
And in the case of asking things that apply to work endeavors, again why does it really matter to the board administration? Is it a question of wanting a cut of the action if someone is able to profit from something they learn here? (e.g. Tuba indicates that paid subscribers may be given more leeway in this than guests) Or a community-minded policy that we would prefer posters who come to chat, participate in various discussions about many subjects, and just don’t like it when someone limits their posts to questions for work? (and there again, if so… why?)
So now you’re doubling down on bringing up stuff that isn’t against the rules? Not only do you keep bringing up him getting paid, which IS NOT AGAINST THE RULES, but now you are making up a new rule that guests have to follow different rules than members.
I get it that you moderators find the idea of someone making money off of information they get from this website to be distasteful. But you’ve also been on record as saying that actions you find distasteful are not reasons to moderate. When Dio was banned, you guys went out of your way to point out that it wasn’t his irritating style of posting but his breaking the “Don’t be a jerk” rule that resulted in his banning.
The point is that this little bit of information is completely irrelevant to whether Reza broke the rules. You guys seem to keep bringing it up as an attempt to get us to side against him. That’s ad hominem. We should be better than that here.
The reason he was moderated was based on the homework rule. The question here is simply whether or not he actually broke that rule. If you think he did, then why do you have to keep bringing up things that have nothing to do with that rule or any others? Are you trying to admit that you don’t have a case?
Because that’s exactly what we would think if you pulled this in Great Debates.
But how does providing incentive to disguise homework questions ‘fight ignorance’?
As I said, I think there’s rather a case to be made for curbing answers that just give the solution without providing any understanding—and that’s true in any case, not just regarding ‘homework questions’. That doesn’t mean that I’d want a rule instituted to that effect, but I think the rule as it is just misses the point.
I didn’t see anywhere that the rules are supposed to apply differently to members and non-members; in fact, in the registration agreement, it explicitly says that the rules apply to ‘all participants’, the only difference being that members don’t see ads. So I don’t see how this fact should ‘count in the equation’.
Ladies and Gentlemen, the germ of an idea for the new Pay-To-Post model. Questions can only be asked by subscribing members unless a guest has a notarized statement that they’re not in any way benefiting from answers to their questions.
The new SDMB motto: Fighting Ignorance for paid members only since 1973 (it’s not paying as well as we thought)
I think the issue is not that he’s getting paid per se, but that his profession is dishonest. It is cheating to pay someone to do your homework. The policy is to not support this type of dishonesty. There is no problem assisting people to do an *honest *job that they are paid for.
If you’re this outraged over the mild deference/distinction made between a guest and a paying member, just wait until you hear about what Charter Members can get away with!
I imagine what they really find distasteful is that someone who’s not them is making money off the site.
Ya’ll have been told that you are not to throw that in our faces!
While that may or may not be true, it wasn’t the reason given. It wasn’t about the legality of the request.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17385691&postcount=31
If you ask in the way indicated by your last sentence, no, that would not be a rules violation.
Where Reza ran afoul of the rules is that he basically did post the question and ask for answers.
[/QUOTE]
Wow, I wouldn’t get to first grade in Mod school. Where’s the line between info and answers?
And there’s nothing worse than a Charter Member who constantly interrupts you to tell you he really is a Charter Member even though it just says “Member” under his name.