My apologies in advance if this is the wrong place to put this, but I didn't think it right to clutter the place up with a fresh thread just for this. I'd like to offer a suggestion as far as the rules/guidelines are concerned, in the form of a 'good faith' practice. In recent times, I've seen an (as far as I can tell) escalating tendency among certain forum users to cast aspersions about the character of other users whenever they disagree with something those others post. I don't mean in chat, I mean that someone posts a scenario, another takes issue with (elements of) that scenerio... and then instead of critiquing the scenario's plausibility, that other user starts hinting that the creator has hidden (and uncouth) political motivations for crafting that scenario. That's what I'd call a witch hunt. I think it would be best if we introduced a practice of 'good faith'. That is: unless someone actively supports a position (as in the case of people posting, for instance, genocide scenarios and calling it 'their ideal world' etc.), the contents of scenarios should not be ascribed to the creator as represwenting his actual beliefs. And more importantly: voicing "suspicions" on that front without any real evidence should be considered very bad form. It's rude, and it's uncalled for. In the make thread, a certain user has in a few days linked me to racist extremism(!) because I expressed support for the concept of "proper grammar" (apperently, this is racist, classist and evil), and that same user has now suggested that another user has secret motivations for posting a Future History map that has left-wing ('SJW') types doing some pretty evil things. In both cases, this accuser pulled the same stunt, which boils down to "disclaiming" the accusation by writing "I'm not accusing you..." -- which is belied by the fact that the accusation is very heavily implied nonetheless. This particular tactic comes across as quite under-handed, and seems aimed at forcing people into self-censorship by linking them to unsavoury political ideals. As far as i'm concerned, if you disagree with the content of a scenario, you should either dispute the plausibility of it... or just ignore it. But there's no justification for the casting of aspersions about someone's character or intentions. If someone starts such a witchj-hunt anyway, mod action against that kind of tactic would be very much appreciated-- at least by me, but I rather suspect by many others as well.