- The rule is quite simple: if you link to it on CS, it must follow CS rules. This doesn't mean you can't have things separate from CS that don't follow CS rules. Our rules regarding taking offsite actions into account (if and only if we can prove who took those actions) are about if those offsite actions are bullying or harassment toward CS users, not if you are an adult who just exists and does things that break CS rules like swearing, gory art, posting videos of yourself to TikTok, etc. CS is not a social media site, so you don't put personal information on here, and it is a site primarily for children and pixel pet collecting, so you don't need to link to your other presences. I don't think I need to explain or have it come as a surprise that I have a whole life on the internet outside of CS that CS has never seen or heard of because it doesn't follow CS rules.
Also, on the subject of user discussion: I don't really understand what the discussion would do other than provide an illusion of participation. I don't know of any other sites that ever discuss important safety rules with their userbase before implementing them, or frankly any rules/changes at all (which we have done when user input could be helpful). We understood that this rule might upset some people and that there were arguments for and against it, which is why we worked so hard to provide you with a full, nuanced explanation of why it was implemented anyway. We decided that while we know it might not be everyone's favorite rule, it is important and non-negotiable. I understand that CS is a close-knit site, and people might feel closer to the moderators who directly interact with both the site and other users in non-moderation contexts. However, that does not mean that important safety rules should be like... put to a forum poll or something? If we hadn't discussed and evaluated every possible argument or exception we could think of (and I do think we got them all based on the response here, as we've clarified some things but nothing has led to a change in the rule) then there might have been some room for the argument that there could have been more discussion, but that's not the case. I don't really have a good conclusion sentence for this paragraph/post, but I hope this helps clarify things at least a little?
It's been over 10 years since 
.png)
.jpg)
.png)
.png)
.png)
