Forum:Retiring COD:LEAK

As some of you may remember, we had a forum a while back for altering COD:LEAK to be more lenient, Forum:Altering COD:LEAK. Since said forum, I have been contacting Activision to further enquire about COD:LEAK, and if we still need the policy in place given their lax attitude towards many other sites. For the past Month I have been e-mailing Activision's legal department directly about if we still need this policy, and for the exact legislation why, as if you look at the contact we received, we were never told the exact legislation. For this full month I received no reply, despite constantly reminding them of a deadline response, and given the nature of these e-mails a one month reply is far too long for any response if one was going to be given.

For the reasons above, I feel it is time we broke free of the shackles of COD:LEAK and finally be on equal footing and be able to create pages on maps, DLCs, weapons and what have you as soon as they can be confirmed as true, instead of having to wait for official announcement. I feel this could greatly benefit us, as many other sites already report on this leaked material and we would finally be able to keep up, instead of having to spend our time removing the information, we could be adding it. In the e-mails I sent, I stated multiple times that lack of response would lead to steps to remove the policy, so Activision cannot complain that we are going though with this forum. I also told Activision if they wish for us to reinstate the policy again they will need to contact us directly, and not Wikia as it was us that tried to contact them in the first place.

I understand people may be put off by the fact this was put in place over Activision bringing up legal issues, so I would like to stress I have made sure to go though the proper channels, and ensured I waited a reasonable time before putting this forum in place. Also, I have been speaking with Callofduty4 in regards to making this forum, hence why we will be sharing our signatures on this introduction. 21:38, February 15, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion
I support this partly because Wikia will be contacted about any infringing material and they will remove it on a case-by-case basis. I also support this because as we've seen, Activision don't really seem to care about whether or not we have it. 21:42, February 15, 2014 (UTC)

Per basically everything said and it'd also help the news. 21:43, February 15, 2014 (UTC)

As long as "leaked" information is held to the same reference standard as everything else I see no reason not to retire the rule. 21:45, February 15, 2014 (UTC)

Per all above, it would also mean we'd be able to stay as up to date as other sites. 22:31, February 15, 2014 (UTC)

The altering of LEAK to be more lenient was an idea that if we couldn't leave the article entirely, than the amendment would do. But since Activision doesn't seem to mind, the rule can be retired. 23:09, February 15, 2014 (UTC)

Why should other sites be granted leniency towards leaked material while we're 'punished' for it? It doesn't make sense. Per all above. 23:55, February 15, 2014 (UTC)

I came into this forum opposing it, but since the leaks will have to be comfirmed true and just rumors, I support it. Also, per Raven's Wing. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 02:38, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

Per Raven's. 07:41, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

didn't we decide that instead of rushing to a vote we'd actually discuss the forum first? or is there simply nothing to say? KλT 09:35, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * We did, however the way I wrote it likely led to the way the responses are. I'd sort of gotten used to writing up forums to go straight to vote. Chances are we can still hold an official vote after 2 weeks or so so if there are any neutrals or opposes they can be addressed before the final cast. 10:03, February 16, 2014 (UTC)