Clicking on the "Forum Rules" link in the User Control Panel elicited a weird message from my browser about missing security certifications. Is this safe to ignore?

Yeah, it's fine. Just go through the hoop of creating your own certificate in the 'advanced' option that pops up and it shouldn't show up again.

Reminder for users on mobile devices: section 2.4 of the rules asks you to post in a form we can actually read. If autocorrect renders your sentences nonsensical, please turn it off or fix its foul-ups before submitting your post.

I would like to seek a clarification as to what is considered as unacceptable comments on each others' (posting) habits, as per the Mod action described in this post plus Paul's and my own comments following it.

Because if advice to other posters is illegal, then we can as well shut down a large number of threads in the OT forum...

Turning a discussion about the site as a whole into an extended tangent on one guy was both off-topic and threatening to become the sort of dogpiling problem that had been mentioned before. Also he didn't ask for advice, and you aren't in a position to arbitrarily hand it out on behalf of the board.

I would think the topic of being intentionally vague and its effects on communication is a valid topic for discussion, though, particularly in that thread.

Also, it would be helpful if people understood the difference between dogpiling and widespread disagreement. If you say something stupid and/or offensive and multiple people comment on it, that's not a dogpile. That's a stupid and/or offensive statement getting its natural response. It's only a dogpile when people are intentionally kicking the original poster when he's down, in an effort to silence or humiliate him. And yes, that's a bad thing, no matter the topic at hand. But extending use of the term to include multiple people expressing polite disagreement is misleading at best, and downright disingenuous at worst.

Dogpiling is generally done to a statement that people disagree with in order to force the person to not respond by inundating them with so many points to contend with the discussion is buried before it began, or in an attempt to respond they end up omnislashing multiple posts to back up their statement, which is against forum rules if I'm not mistaken.

In the SD forum where this happened often, it was generally done as a silencing tactic rather than anything to do with polite conversation, which is (partly or in large part) what led to SD being closed. Calling it anything else is disingenuous at its best and worst.

DarkBluePhoenix wrote:
In the SD forum where this happened often, it was generally done as a silencing tactic rather than anything to do with polite conversation,

I never posted in SD except to inquire as to someone's point of view, attempt to change their mind, or illuminate spectators who read without participating.

The feedback thread is not an invitation to continue a graveyarded tangent, guys. Like it or not, an answer was given.

I mean we also generally frown on people obstinately continuing conversation threads that have been intentionally locked or purged, so don't push it.