Rumour Engine Guide lines/Rules

[Harleqvin]

It was suggested to me that I should maybe write about this in here.

I was wondering if the mods can have a talk about Rumour Engine thread rules in NR&A?

The way the Rumour Engine articles have been designed is to usually be pretty vague about if it is for AoS or 40k.

It seems that talks about what the image could be should all be fine even if it is AoS (as long as people don't start talking about tactics for AoS, or rules for AoS, etc,  and/or anything like hateful bs of any sort. Just about what it could be should be fine even if it is AoS, as long as it doesn't turn to talking about other stuff of AoS. you know?)

It seems kinda against the grain of the Rumour Engine if we can't discuss about the image being from AoS, if it seems like it could be about AoS. Saying that as the whole point of the Rumour Engine is to cause discussion about what the Photo might be about, and if we can't talk about what the photo may be about, it makes the whole point about the Rumour Engine moot.

I just think there should be some new guide lines when it comes to talking about Rumour Engine articles/images because of the purpose of the Rumour Engine articles/images.

And keeping with the idea being able to talk about what the photo is (even if AoS related as long as we don't go into AoS talks of the game's mechanics, tactics and such,) then we can keep from having multiple Rumour Engine threads for the particular month. We can keep the thread for the particular month rolling while just adding the new week's image to add to the discussion and such.



On an aside, I use parts from Fantasy/AoS for stuff in 40k. Like Helmets/Shields off of Chaos Warriors and such as they fit really well with a Knight aesthetic (I'm doing Dark Angels and those pieces and others fit for things I am doing,) and I know quite a few other people do too. So if something new comes out for AoS I look at it too for things I can use to kit bash and I keep a note of them and kind of getting an idea if the model is for AoS gives me an idea to what to look for. I also know that many other people do similar, about the parts for converting and kitbashing, not necessarily for DA..., but I think you understand this little paragraph... Knowing something in a Rumour Engine article is for AoS gives me a heads up.
 

[Chaplain Lucifer]

My two non-admin binding cents.

Maybe because rumor engine are not real rumors, but more on the lines of "Make your own rumors". And N&R section is about posting rumors, not making your own.

So why have 20+ pages making stuff up, iscussing, getting exhalted and salty, about nothing in concrete just to later to find out that the the actual thing was totally opposite of what people were fantasizing/fabricating.

Isn't that wasted time? Isn't better to just relax and wait for what comes instead of getting hyped over nothing?

Being BnC a board about 40K doesn't it look like a bit foolish (lacking better word) to spend 20+ pages raving about a part of a picture to later finding out it was an AoS product that doesn't even rate to be used as conversion for 40K?

 

Just saying.

[WarriorFish]

The rules of the B&C always have precedence - the important one here is that the B&C is for the discussion of 40k and not any other gaming system. If it is AoS, then it has no place here same as any AoS discussion. That GW intentionally keeps the image vague doesn't void this rule.

 

As such, the rules adequately cover this already. If it might be 40k it can be discussed within the context of that. As Chaplain Lucifer says just because GW have released a snippet of a model doesn't mean it's automatically valid for posting in the N&R.

[Harleqvin]

Then the Rumour Engine threads should just not be allowed then.
 

[IronDrake28]

I don't think so. There's been some like Cypher's pistol and the back of the new GK dude where we knew it was something 40k.

[WarriorFish]

Indeed. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some common sense be applied - some of them will be 40k, some of them won't. That doesn't mean none of them should be allowed.

[Bryan Blaire]

Also, it was already addressed by the Admins that "I can use something from Fantasy in 40K"/kit-bashing is not a valid reason to allow Fantasy stuff to be posted. That still holds true. If you can kit bash with it, then it will become relevant when someone posts a model with the part kit bashed in. We don't mind people saying where they got stuff from, as long as that's as far as it goes. If someone starts down the "This is why this model is great in Fantasy", then the post has violated the rules and is subject to removal, and depending on the frequency/severity, disciplinary action as well.

 

I've tried to steer the Rumor Engine things back to 40K discussion several times, but if all people want to post is "Clearly AoS", then as others have said, the thread has no place here. AoS has even less valid discussion possibilities than Xenos do on this board, Xenos has some per the rules, Fantasy/AoS has none.

[Joe]

I still think linking to BolS/Natfka for any other reason but to laugh at them should incur a ban.

[Bryan Blaire]

(Un)Fortunately, however you want to look at it, that itself is not a rule the Admins have put into place.

[Harleqvin]

I'm not saying allow talk of AoS plainly. If it turns out it is AoS then sure lock it, if the consensus/majority thought is that it's from AoS. Lock it.

The issue is when it's not certain it's from either and then any people who post about it being from AoS gets removed and/or because people talk about it possibly being from AoS is what's causing it to be locked and not the fact that it is from AoS is what I'm talking about.

It just seems against the grain of the Rumour Engine that any talk of trying to figure out what it's from is only allowed if you don't talk about it being from any other game system/setting than the one.

The most recent one a lot of people were thinking GC or Bloodletters, Tyranids and such. Mostly saying 40k, and then an Admin just says it has to be AoS and it got locked when a lot of people still thought it could be 40k oriented.

How was that ok when almost all of the people were saying it was 40/30k oriented?



All I am saying is that there needs to be some better way for the Discussion of Rumour Engine stuff.

[Castellan Snaeper]

I completely agree with this.

 

I believe as long as discussion on 40k is healthy, mentions of AoS shouldn't be blacklisted.

 

Simply ignoring the fact that it could be from another game makes the discussion seem empty and half hearted.

 

I appreciate that B&C Community moderators are proactive and vigilant, and I come to B&C to discuss 40k and visit other forums to talk about other games.

 

But the Rumor Engine posts are always going to have a strong possibility of being AoS or Xenos related and mentions of that shouldnt be automatically blacklisted. We dont live in a Grimdark Universe and I will happily accept a permanent ban rather than dealing with the kind of head in the sand censorship I was subjected to about making an innocent AoS speculative comment. "I'm about 95% sure this is Aelves from AoS" was the comment."

 

It just seems like the Moderators are taking on an unnecessary amount of work for themselves at the detriment of constructive speculation.

[WarriorFish]

There is no censorship on the B&C, because that's not how it works. If this is due to your post it was hidden by mistake and this has since been corrected.

 

AoS features in enough posts for it to be clear that it's not blacklisted and never has been, all that is required is some sense is applied within the context of the topic. I don't believe that is difficult, and from the number of said posts that refer to AoS it appears that the majority of members understand this.

[Castellan Snaeper]

There is no censorship on the B&C, because that's not how it works. If this is due to your post it was hidden by mistake and this has since been corrected.

 

AoS features in enough posts for it to be clear that it's not blacklisted and never has been, all that is required is some sense is applied within the context of the topic. I don't believe that is difficult, and from the number of said posts that refer to AoS it appears that the majority of members understand this.

Thank you, I apologize for coming off a bit testy. I noticed one of the other posts had been edited and mentioned AoS as a reason so I inappropriately assumed that the rules of 40k being the topic were being applied heavily. 

[WarriorFish]

That's ok, but please try to avoid inappropriate assumptions in the future