Posts referring to NACA

[Rusty Nails]

Just out of interest, and to avoid me possibly breaking the rules in future, do the CC Forum rules allow specific discussions/comments about the NACA forum or issues with it? Obviously they should not take place in a manner that derails an existing thread, but is the topic itself forbidden?

I have looked in the Rules and guidelines but have not found anything other than not allowing discussion of news and current affairs topics.

 

[jowwy]

Line two states - NOTHING comes back over to cyclechat

 

[Rusty Nails]

View attachment 660824

Line two states - NOTHING comes back over to cyclechat

Thanks.

Like many rules that can be taken in different ways. Does it mean that discussions are not to be continued on CC from that site or that any mention at all about attitudes/behaviours on NACA is not allowed?

 

[jowwy]

Thanks.

Like many rules that can be taken in different ways. Does it mean that discussions are not to be continued on CC from that site or that any mention at all about attitudes/behaviours on NACA is not allowed?

i think the word NOTHING .....in big black bold letters sums it up for me

 

[Randomnerd]

Hey Rusty; you've had your answer.
Now get back over there and suffer.
Best of British

 

[Alex321]

Thanks.

Like many rules that can be taken in different ways. Does it mean that discussions are not to be continued on CC from that site or that any mention at all about attitudes/behaviours on NACA is not allowed?

I don't see ambiguity in that one.

The NACA offshoot isn't really a part of cyclechat proper. Any issues with behaviour or attitude needs to be sorted over there, among the members there.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Hey Rusty; you've had your answer.
Now get back over there and suffer.
Best of British

Now that I see it's in big bold letters I have to accept it's true.

I'm only here for the R&R.

 

[jowwy]

It was in big bold letters before, but you still questioned it…..but hey ho

 

[Rusty Nails]

It was in big bold letters before, but you still questioned it…..but hey ho

Should have gone to Specsavers.

In my defence it is not actually in the Rules or Guidelines, where I looked, but in a separate post from @Shaun about the new forum, so is it a rule or a guideline?

 

[Arrowfoot]

Should have gone to Specsavers.

No need, your first reading was correct.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Like many rules that can be taken in different ways. Does it mean that discussions are not to be continued on CC from that site or that any mention at all about attitudes/behaviours on NACA is not allowed?

Mod Note:
Both, please, as per @Shaun's wishes.
It is really bad form to discuss another board, imo.
This goes not only for NACA, but for other cycling fora too.
Thank you!