If we're following the current rules, then yes, you're right. People shouldn't be stupid and get threads closed purely because of their need to talk about a game. I'm saying that I think the rules could be changed. I'm just advocating the use of some kind of "don't ask, don't tell" style policy, rather than the headache of trying to prove someone has a legal version, an import, a download, or a super-exclusive insider copy. In the end, for the people on the other side of this internet forum, it really doesn't make the blindest bit of difference.
It just seems to me that it could be as obvious as the sun that somebody has downloaded a game, but as long as they aren't posting direct links, there's nothing that would actually get OcUK in trouble.
Is that really much different to the way the competitor rule works at the moment anyway? People aren't allowed to talk about which shop they got a game in, so why don't we just stop people talking about where they got the game altogether, and outlaw any mischevous "hinting".weebull, the problem with that approach is fairly simple and two fold.
1: the "pirates" tend to want to think they are clever and cannot wait to hint "oh, well I got it from Tom Orrent in Penzance Bay"
2: It's fairly obvious to the people that when someone starts talking about playing a game ages before release, when it's just hit the warez servers that they are playing a pirated game.
It just seems to me that it could be as obvious as the sun that somebody has downloaded a game, but as long as they aren't posting direct links, there's nothing that would actually get OcUK in trouble.