Draft community rules

[bssc]

Thanks Janet for working on this. Sorry about the Grandma reference though.

 

[twaddle]

Well done. I especially liked "Many of them are brilliant. Some are doofi." Is it possible for me to get an official "doofus" title?

BTW, when you view the guidelines, the link in the upper left that should return you to the forums gives me a 404.

Early Retirement & Financial Independence Community

 

[Janet H]

Thanks for the heads up - I think it's fixed now.

 

[Coach]

Nice job, Janet.

Coach

 

[bright eyed]

Tee hee, there's a minor error here:

"political discussions on health insurance can be on the health insurance forum"

 

[Janet H]

Tee hee, there's a minor error here:

"political discussions on health insurance can be on the health insurance forum"

Seems as though no matter how many times you read something..... I made the change you pointed out. Thanks.

 

[CuppaJoe]

I find the admonishment to stay strictly on-topic very much at odds with how the forun is now and how it has been historically. I suggest you strike that dictum entirely from the rules. Threads here quite successfully meander off and sometimes back on topic and usually the conversation is more interesting for it.

Love your new Avatar, Brew! But I can't stand it, what was the old one? It was one of those things I could almost place. (Sorry for the digression).

I would love to see, maybe, four conversations going on at once with poster's linking off of any previous post, very dynamic. This works fine for those of us who read chronologically.