Forum Rules

[Brocco Guy]

You can say lulz, just not +4|_|< |_1|<3 +|-|15.

Ok, good. Lulz is something I say usually, nowadays.

"Lulz" isn't leet per se, it's a variety of annoying 4chan-speak.

It also isn't a synonym for "luls". Lulz is specifically defined as enjoyment derived from the suffering of others, not just any enjoyment/laughter.

Oh...so I've been using it out of context....

"Anonymous gets truly epic lulz from raids and invasions."

AACK! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Silly Fox News.

[Johnny K.]

Swearing is allowed...you motherf%@#ers you piece of s$@! you motherf%$&ing b$@#^

just kidding

[Sherkel]

Swearing is allowed...you motherf%@#ers you piece of s$@! you motherf%$&ing b$@#^

just kidding

But spam isn't...just don't do this again when you have more than 10 posts.

[Photon-Phoenix]

CENSORING IS
NOT
AGAINST THE RULES!

[Sasara]

You can say lulz, just not +4|_|< |_1|<3 +|-|15.

4(+|_|4|_|_*/, */0|_| (4|\| 5|*34|< ||\| 1337.

^ translation: Actually, you can speak in 1337.

There's nothing in the rules that specifically forbid it, and GARY agrees that it is allowed. However, it would be rather exploitive of a loophole if you were to use it in every single post, and not for humour purposes.

As it is unreadable, it can count as spam, excepted by special cases that require your common sense.

It doesn't count as AOL speak/chat speak/txt speak as these are meant as quick typing for lazy people, and 1337 is definitely not lazy.

[Full Metal Glitch]

Agreed. Leet takes precision to type, a poorly typed leet sentence can royally confuse anybody, even those most fluent in leetspeak.

[Photon-Phoenix]

Trashed SCf3's post and the reaction post.

[SCf3]

Trashed SCf3's post and the reaction post.

No idea what the reaction post was, but okay

[Calhaora]

okay leetspeak is okay but a cant write u?
that's unfair

[Photon-Phoenix]

okay leetspeak is okay but a cant write u?
that's unfair

1337 speak is not okay.

[chippy2000]

You know what? I really think 1337 seems to be a bit stupid. Translation is hard, it is always used by trolls, and it's getting on my nerves.

I think it should be banned. 

[SCf3]

You know what? I really think 1337 seems to be a bit stupid. Translation is hard, it is always used by trolls, and it's getting on my nerves.

I think it should be banned. 

You're a little late on that.

[pokechu22]

It looks like the "Bump" rule is missing?

8.Stickies, by their nature, cannot be "bumped" and thus are exempt from this rule.

Above it, it doesn't define "Bump"ing, which may make this a bit confusing. 

[SCf3]

It looks like the "Bump" rule is missing?

8.Stickies, by their nature, cannot be "bumped" and thus are exempt from this rule.

Above it, it doesn't define "Bump"ing, which may make this a bit confusing.

Do you not know what bump means...?

[Abwayax]

It used to be against the rules to post in a thread that had not been posted in at most one month. So if a thread's last post was in 2007 and you posted in it today, that would be a bump. It's called a bump because it moves the thread to the top of the thread index. It is sometimes referred to as necroposting (because it brings a dead thread back to life). On help forums, it's common for people to post a message consisting solely of the word "bump" to force it back to the top of the thread index. Stickies are always at the top of the thread index, so the rule did not apply to them.

I'm guessing that rule was removed following the reopening of the forums, as every thread on the forum was a couple years old at that point.