GuildWiki talk:Disregard all rules

What do you think? &mdash; (P)/(T) 19:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi guys! My name's common sense! Lord of all tyria 19:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Pleased to meet you, common sense. My names "It might be nice as a policy, though". &mdash;[[Image:MaySig.png]] (P)/(T) 19:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't see why this is necessary, specially since its covering a whole, single scenario, where people ignore 1RV anyways. Lord of all tyria 19:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, its not necessary, but at least this way people can say "We 'aint breaking any policies doing this". &mdash;[[Image:MaySig.png]] (P)/(T) 19:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * We should probably add this as an exception clause to GW:1RV instead of making a whole new policy for it, especially since "disregard all rules" may make people believe that breaking NPA when dealing with vandals is okay, and despite them being vandals, it still isn't. GW:AGF has an exception clause as well, so we might as well do that instead --Gimmethegepgun 19:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Makes sense. Was going to say that. Lord of all tyria 19:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't forget GW:QDV. This policy would make that pointless. --Macros 19:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

/agree with Gimme. Add it as a clause in GW:1RV, I don't think it needs to be its own policy. -- Shadowphoenix  17:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This thing is still up? I thought we'd agreed on its deletion a long time ago.. =| &mdash;[[Image:MaySig.png]] Warw/Wick 17:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Unneeded
Sysops enforce the spirit of the policy, meaning that this is null and void, IMO RT | Talk  19:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That required its own header? Lord of all tyria 19:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Evidently to RT it did. We just had this discussion up there.. &mdash;[[Image:MaySig.png]] (P)/(T) 19:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, pointless policy. I'd say add it to 1RV, but it's already there[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]]Entrea  [Talk]  01:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)