I'd just like to highlight a message above: "The decision on whether or not a post violates the Terms of Use lies with the staff member, **not** with the user, so no, this does not only apply when the user feels like their post doesn't violate Terms of Use."

This should not be true. When a user agrees to the Terms of Use, they are not agreeing to what a staff member may interpret breaking it: they are agreeing specifically to the written and stated terms. The truth of the matter is that the "contributions must be civil and tasteful" rule is stupid. What is considered tasteful by one staff member is maybe considered not by the other. Frankly this rule and arguably the one below it need to be properly broken down so it's CRYSTAL CLEAR what can and what cannot be said on the forum. In its current state it is being abused.

I'd just like to highlight a message above: "The decision on whether or not a post violates the Terms of Use lies with the staff member, **not** with the user, so no, this does not only apply when the user feels like their post doesn't violate Terms of Use." This should not be true. When a user agrees to the Terms of Use, they are not agreeing to what a staff member may interpret breaking it: they are agreeing specifically to the written and stated terms. The truth of the matter is that the "contributions must be civil and tasteful" rule is stupid. What is considered tasteful by one staff member is maybe considered not by the other. Frankly this rule and arguably the one below it need to be properly broken down so it's CRYSTAL CLEAR what can and what cannot be said on the forum. In its current state it is being abused.