Thread 8327

Henlo
On /vm/ there are ~20 'general' threads on the board right now, having either 'general' in the name, a /xyzg/ identifier, 'dummy text' edition, or links to prior threads.
The board rule three is:
>"Generals"—long-term, recurring threads about a specific game—should be posted in /vg/. This is not to say threads about specific games cannot be created on /vm/, just that long-term, recurring threads belong in /vg/.
However, reports on /vm/ are rare, and I've not seen any for a general where the report seems to be complaining that it exists, as much as one can interpret the reasoning behind a report. Additionally, as a janny and regular of /vg/ as well, I'm fairly certain the /vm/ generals would not survive on /vg/ due to post frequency issues (/vg/ is much faster, /vm/ generals would die without a lot of bump posting).
I don't really want to just delete/WR a bunch of threads despite them being clearly rulebreaking, since anons seem to enjoy being able to have a general for the more niche games and others don't seem to complain, at least via a method I can see.
Can this rule be discussed more? If generals were so prevalent or fast that they choked out non-general content I could see it being an issue, but as is that doesn't seem to be the case. I also see an argument in leaving the rule as is and not enforcing it unless a problem arises, but it is misleading that way. I should also mention I know this exists with at least a starcraft thread on /vst/, and some popular games have eternal general-esque threads on /vrpg/ but not to the same extent at all.
Just looking for any others' thoughts.

>>8327 (OP)
video games are gay
OP btfo

>>8327 (OP)
The generals rule is an handover from /v/ since all the new /v/ off-shoots share its board-specific rules. Strictly speaking a general is anything called "general" in the OP text or subject or anything referring to "editions", anything containing links to pastebins or too many links to wikis or guides or event related things within the context of it being a recurring thread and not some thread made deliberately to discuss some event or other. Backlinking to the previous thread is fine (you'd think it wouldn't be) and so is having a link or two in there as long as it isn't a pastebin. People will also often post all the links and dumps in the thread instead of the OP which also breaks the rule.
I don't think that anyone thinks that the rule is useful on these boards since people just make one after the other threads anyway without the general formatting so they don't get moderated; all it does is occasionally shit on dozens to hundreds of posters in a given thread and make them re-do the thread without the forbidden text. Mod wise the responses to generals are wide ranging, I've had someone lock a thread because it was a general which makes an example out of the practice whilst some other times I've had mods shrug because the general happened to have 200 or so posts so I should instead wait for weeks/months for it to die before enforcing the rule.
Nonetheless it's still a rule so you should enforce it, most of the threads on most boards don't break the rule despite being one after the other threads too (not even 4chan mods are draconian enough to be super strict about it) so you likely won't have to do anything for months if you properly stamp out the actual generals from the given board.