I did you blind cowbag ^^^

Not to me you didn't

I think you've been swallowing the boaby too much gal

dubmeup wrote:
That your new favourite word ya glaikit fucker

Isn't


My new favourite word is, quefe.


As in the sound of the boaby departing the sketted one's gash

Now get back to blowing quefe bubbles

Most of the legalese is unnecessary and probably unenforceable anyway. Just because a term is written into a contract doesn't mean it is enforceable, especially if it's deemed to be an "unfair term" or if it is over-ridden by other laws.

In terms of copyright, the person who owns the copyright is the person who wrote the post and it can not be signed away. My understanding of the law concerning internet forums is that the copyright holder grants the forum a licence to retain the posts and this right remains even if the poster closes his/her account or is banned from the forum. If the forum tries to make money by publishing the posts in another format, e.g. publishing a "Best of Sanctum Zone" book, it could be open to being sued for royalties from the copyright holders.

In an ideal world, I think the rules could be simplified to the the following:
1) Don't be a dick.
2) Remember the "golden rule" - treat others as you would like to be treated.

If everybody stuck to those, everything else would be unnecessary really. Of course we don't live in an ideal world and more rules are needed to protect the forum and the good members.

However, I've noticed that we seem to be remarkably free of the dickheads who have ruined the other place at the moment. Maybe just don't invite them - and rebuff them if they do show up?

We've had one or two turn up, but they seem to lose interest and fuck off sharpish once the SZ community moderates them.

diamondgeezer wrote:
You still have one who creates arugments for arguments sake

dawnbreak wrote: