Here are the rules for #neutralzone, the neutral debate and discussion room for SCP users and related people. These are as maintained by ___, the owner of the room.

1. Absolutely no directly SCP-related discussion. I know it's paradoxical, but there are fifteen rooms you can have those conversations in; this is for SCP people, members of the community, to discuss real issues in the real world. I don't care who wrote what, who banned who, what someone said on 05. This is for discussion of actual issues: world violence, terrorism, taxation, economics, political science, philosophy, history, sexuality, et cetera.

2. Carrying from #1: The only people not permitted to visit and discuss issues in #neutralzone are:

  • people who have been banned from #neutralzone for violating these rules
  • specific users on a case-by-case basis who have been banned from the SCP community at large for violation of the Harassment Policy.

Even if you are banned from the wiki or other chatrooms, you will be permitted in #neutralzone so long as you do not fall into one of these two groups. We're looking for people proven capable of carrying on an intelligent conversation, not popular people.

3. No bullshit. What this means is:

  • If your argument falls clearly into a formal or informal logical fallacy and you are called out on it, you need to improve your argument, not complain about being called out. You may appeal to an op for summary judgment on the quality of the argument if you think the call was unwarranted, and ops will adjudicate those disputes accordingly.
  • If your argument appears to reference or center on potentially sourceable facts (statistical evidence, external facts, etc.), you may be called upon to provide a source. You will not be barraged with demands to provide pages and pages of sources — see Rule #4.

4. Do not abuse Rule #3. You are allowed to believe that someone else's argument is flawed, but if you are "calling bullshit" more than twice or so, you may as well get an op's attention and have the conversation adjudicated in that manner. Spamming "bullshit" calls to throw up unclearable obstacles to the other person's argument in the conversation is worse than making bullshit in the first place, and ops will treat it as such.

5. No personal attacks on anyone else. It's absolutely fine to disagree with somebody for their politics, but personal attacks against them are unnecessary and unacceptable. Find a better way to express your disagreement.

5b. To this end, slurs are not permitted when they are directed at other users. This is a room for free discussion between all, and attempting to force somebody out of a discussion with hateful shit is not allowed.

6. Ops may pause conversation to clarify the point under discussion (so as to ensure that people are actually discussing the same topic and aren't talking at cross-purposes), but conversation will only be stopped if

  • only one side remains OR
  • the conversation is no longer productively discussing the topic (i.e. excessive bullshit or fallacies), at which point the conversation will be stopped.

7. Kicks will be liberally distributed at op discretion. Don't take offense to them if an op believes it's the most effective way of maintaining order. Which leads to #8…

8. Contact kaktus/djkaktus if you have a problem with an op's behavior. Be sure to have logs. Ops will be defended so long as their behavior is in line with the spirit of the room (i.e. is promoting healthy discussion in some form), but if you feel that this wasn't the case, let him know.

9. Your access to +V may be revoked if an operator feels you are in violation of any of these rules, or if you have gotten out of control. This is a civil channel, and the ops are free to enforce that.

10. The Offense Rule. I'm not going to say "don't be offended by things", because that's a little ambitious and outside the scope of an IRC channel. Instead, think of it this way. In the case that an argument is being made that you find offensive, either:

  • the argument is unorthodox but logically sound and sincerely presented, in which case you are free to challenge the argument or allow it to die naturally, OR
  • the argument is stupid and presented solely for shock value, in which case you are free to ask an op to issue a stop order, ban, or both. And the p ass w o rd is Hail Hydra.

In short, conversation will not be stopped or curtailed solely because another person finds it offensive. It may be stopped because it's a troll argument being made for shock value (i.e. "The Holodomor never happened because Ukrainians are lying scum"), it may be stopped if the argument itself is too flawed to have significant value (i.e. "The Holodomor never happened because no true Communist system would allow it to happen"), but it will not be stopped simply because it presents an unorthodox or unusual premise (i.e. "The Holodomor never happened because the deaths in the Ukrainian famine can be more easily attributed to bureaucratic oversight and overambitious centralized planning, rather than deliberate malice and an attempt to exterminate the kulaks").

Operator List:

Username Position
kaktus Owner
ProcyonLotor Admin
Lurkd Operator
Silber Operator