In reply to:
But I have a feeling that if a less prominant poster were to so liberally provide links to, for example, Tubgirl there would be calls for his swift banning. I don't want special treatment.
I have no doubt that a less prominent poster would be banned for that sort of thing, but I would't call it "special treatment," I'd call it giving you the benefit of the doubt because you've earned a positive reputation, as have I, as has Dara, as have many who would be treated similarly under similar circumstances.
Sure, if a newbie showed up and posted nothing but tubgirl, s/he'd be immediately banned. That's 'cause that sort of poster is called a "troll." They contribute nothing and exist just to shit-stir, so why waste space on them?
When a newbie shows up and posts a bunch of inappropriate pictures but then refuses to leave and comments irreverently every time he's abused, we call that sort of poster "Claude," and the grow to accept him and even love him precisely for his refusal to be intimidated.
But when a poster has a lengthy history of some of the best posts in the history of the board, when his absence leaves a void, when he's respected by the likes of Dara, well, there are some benefits. Monkeyboy, you've commented yourself on how you can rest on the laurels of your history, which is true to an extent, but it's not something that was bestowed upon you, it's something you earned. So when you go through a little period of inappropriateness, the assumption is not made that you're a jackass, the assumption is made that you're going through some kind of phase. Your "adolescence," if you will. So rather than an immediate ban if you cross the line, the mods come to you personally. I think this is a perfect example of the self-moderation working exactly as it should.
So back to the original point - whether there should be rules. The thing is, you don't know what rules you need until the lines are crossed. Who knew when the board started that an explicit rule prohibiting embedded porn would be necessary? So yeah, rules-as-you-go works just fine, I think.
Besides, it's not like anyone gets insta-banned for doing something. They're told to not be an ass and if they stop, everything's fine. At least that's what I remember. Since I haven't been around lately this may have changed, and I would not be in favor of that.
I think Ruskie's impeachment proceedings make a lot of sense, though I can't think of anyone I'd apply them to currently.
I'm not a fan of our current president, but on the other hand, I don't think he's a Demon. Perhaps a small, trident weilding Imp, but no Demon.