Are there FAQ I don't know about?

[Mogle]

Conclusion/point of this thread:
In all due respect, everything that may be reason enough for infraction/s for users be in the Forum FAQ, Forum Rules or possibly in the Wiki FAQ.


Hi there. I just wanted to know if the Rules, the Wiki FAQ and the Forum FAQ is complete with all the rules and non-supported subjects that may render one with infraction in form of "point/s"?

I seem to, sadly, have dragged infractions on to my account already. No point in making a fuzz about that; it was a mistake on my behalf since it actually was against the regulations.

The thing is, I can't seem to find the rule against it in either of these sources.
This was the explanation I got in my email inbox about my infraction:


Dear Mogle,

You have received an infraction at BackTrack Forums.

Reason: Opening a thread on a subject where a search on the forum would have revealed the answer
-------
Topic covered thread deleted.
We do not support adding users to BT. Try reading the forum faq. It's a rule you agreed to.
-------


This seems to be in order; it is clear that my infraction is in order. The only thing I can't get my head around is where it says that adding users is not supported by the BT community?
This is not in any way an appeal against my infraction which is, in fact, correct - but there seems to be rules that are not covered in the FAQ-pages and the Rules.

I think new users, with even less general forum-experience than I have, will have a hard enough time to follow the rules that ARE written, without having to worry about half-hidden restrictions that may render them restricted before they know why because they're not in enough plain sight to be seen.


Again, this is not in any way an appeal or meant to be in disrespect for the Moderators, but a tip for the future.

Cheers, and good luck with all of your BT'ing!

[sickness]

Just so you understand, the Rules, Wiki and FAQ's you mentioned are made for "general infractions" if I may say so. However we can't possibly predict every infraction a user might commit and set a rule against it or add it to the FAQ's.

Now regarding to your issue about adding a user, here is why we don't support it: http://www.backtrack-linux.org/wiki/...un_as_root_.3F

Backtrack was made for the root account, most of it's usage requires root privileges therefor adding a regular user is simply useless.

[Mogle]

Just so you understand, the Rules, Wiki and FAQ's you mentioned are made for "general infractions" if I may say so. However we can't possibly predict every infraction a user might commit and set a rule against it or add it to the FAQ's.

I, of course, understand this. i myself have written and upheld more than my share of forum rules as moderator and administrator over a few forums, and I know that you have to generalize...

Now regarding to your issue about adding a user, here is why we don't support it: http://www.backtrack-linux.org/wiki/...un_as_root_.3F

Backtrack was made for the root account, most of it's usage requires root privileges therefor adding a regular user is simply useless.

... however, if I had more infractions prior to this, I would possibly have been banned. Without really knowing why.

Nowhere on the Wiki or in the rules have I noticed that there are regulations against asking for help to get a non-root account going, and that it could result in restriction of your account, if you're really unlucky.

That's my whole point - It's nothing wrong to generalize rules, but that can only happen with rules that the users may already have a "feel" for, or assume from the other rules that ARE given.
I now have no idea at all what other things I may need help with in the future that is against the rules, simply because the rules aren't clear for new members. And that's a problem for as long as you're lending our hands to new members.