Forum:Chat Policy?

<!--

I have been discussing an issue with two of my fellow users (who wish to remain anonymous). We have discovered that we have an issue with the Chat Policy. No, it's not an issue with the actual policy, but instead, an issue with what an admin has been telling us is the policy. An admin, Bullet Fracisco, has been telling Chat Moderators what the chat policy is, but after reviewing the current policy, we're not too sure which one is real. We're not sure if Kyle is going with the policy, or is going against it. This forum is about finding out which one is the legitimate policy, and which one we should follow. When the users and I were discussing it, we discovered some things that Bullet has told us that is not listed in the policy. These are what we came together to discover: Bullet told us one time that we can say the word (pardon my use of foul language) ass if it were not directed towards anyone. Then one time he told us that, once a user who does not have the required edits to be on the chat has been warned, we kick them if they had enough time to read the warning but don't leave. Then he also told us that it's against the rules to use caps often, but in the rules, it says to use caps persistently. And along with that, Bullet says we can't use all caps in one message. And another thing that's not listed in the policy is using emotes that were banned in the past. The chat had troll emotes that were deleted for the use of trolling. Originally, there was a decision. If someone knew about the banned emotes and not to use them, but used them, they got kicked. But if someone didn't know about the rule, they got a warning. Bullet told us that to kick people even if they didn't know about the rule. And above all, Bullet also told us that, as long as it follows, or falls along the lines of a certain rule in the policy, we can make up any rule. This is what the two users and I have discovered. All of these either go against or are not even in the chat policy. But since we have been following the orders of an admin and enforcing them, we believe that we may have possibly made a problem with the chat community, making them follow rules we don't even know are rules. This is why we decided to make this. We want to know which one is correct: The chat policy, or Bullet? We don't know if Bullet is going against the chat policy or is actually correct, so that's why we need help, to decide which policy is the one we need to follow. And the two users and I also talked about some extra things. They relate to the chat policy, and we wish to mention them. One extra thing is the rule about saying what you're linking on the chat before you link it. We don't know why this is a rule. There's already a rule saying that, if we post a link, it can't have swearing or inappropriate. If that's the case, what we'd be linking has to be user-friendly, and having to say a warning about what it is will be unnecessary. We decided to request removing that rule. The last extra thing is the how we deal with underedit users that come onto the chat. For those who don't know, underedit users are users who have less than 100 edits and 50 mainspace edits that come onto the chat, and are not allowed to be there. There has never been a real, confirmed way to deal with the underedit users. This has made the way to deal with them become changed in many ways, and according to one of our anonymous users, Bullet's the one who keeps changing it. We decided that we should have a real, official way to deal with the underedit users, and here is where we can decide. This is all we had to say on the Chat Policy issue, and we want to know what our fellow users on the SNN has to say about what we have to say. This is just a way to clear things up, and make the community aware that we may be making mistakes. - -