I can see your point to an extent, but it I still feel that more feedback on individual incidents would be useful.
If I see someone get banned but I have no idea what it is for then it is not going to help me avoid it in future. It could be a borderline issue, or something that is fairly innocent that could be repeated by anyone, or it could be something that needs to be challenged because it was over-moderated. If the feedback is vague at best then I have no idea what is going on. If that's what the moderators want then so be it, but don't complain about a lack of engagement with the non-staff members of the forum (isn't that what this thread is all about? Engaging with the members?)
Did you read the rest of my post? What's the point in highlighting it to me if I'm already following the rules? If it is aimed at the people who don't follow the rules and won't read the charter then why am I even being involved at this level? Just deal with the problem users and leave the rest of us out of it.
There are two possibilities here that I can see... either this is an attempt to make the forums more dry/clinical, or it is a pointless exercise, because the people that are already behaving themselves don't need reminding, and the troublemakers who won't pay attention to it anyway just need dealing with separately.
Yes, I did read the rest of your post.
It looks to me, as a noob here, as if the point of the charter is to try to clarify the intended tone of the forums, the atmosphere that's desired. It's not about changing rules, but about trying to give members a feel for that tone, and how to avoid getting moderated. I'd bet that however mods try to write a prescriptive list of rules, it won't be detailed enough for everybody. If, however, they can get across the feel for the intended atmosphere, then a lot of the nastier, and unnecessary prodding and poking that takes place in 'discussions', for instance, would clearly be outside that atmosphere even if not quite necessarily outside the rules.
I'd also bet, not least because I've seen it even in a few weeks here, that there's a minority that, like kids, seek to push the edges of the limits the rules impose. Rather than just defining rules, and letting those individuals see how far they can push it, the "charter" seems to be more about having an atmosphere encouraging a discussion on the actual subject, as opposed to who can push whose buttons most without getting told off.
Even in my short time, I've given up on a few threads because they got to be more like a playground spat than a rational discussion on issues.
I take your point about a bit more detail helping us to know what to avoid, but can't help think that if we all follow rules, like on links, and on being "polite, courteous and respectful", I think the phrase was, then we each can avoid needing mod action without knowing quite what someone else did wrong. If the comment said "deleted for swearing", or for insults, what does that tell us that helps, given that we do, or should, already know not to do that.
I've never done what was leveled at me, I just didn't believe that there was any value in arguing the point.
