I'm not bored, y'all are most entertaining.
But I will explain my comment.
In every community, online or otherwise, a group dynamic will form and people will align with or take different roles within it.
Despite the rules that are in place at the formation of or in place on the joining of the community, eventually the members get comfortable enough to attempt some kind of 'coup' - they want to change the terms and conditions to better suit the community they perceive. They will invariably support this proposed change by using the evidence presented by the experiences of the people in their own cliques. They demand that things evolve, and when they don't or they repeatedly receive an answer they don't like instead of looking at their own contribution to the discomfort, they just get louder - believing that protest will win the day. It's rather a romantic notion.
What actually happens is that the people running these sites, usually free to members, will realise that no one is clicking on the adverts, everyone is arguing, no one wants to moderate the mess and it's not a 'community' any more, it's a behemoth of unpleasantness and partition populated by a bunch of keyboard guerrillas. I becomes non viable as a commercial enterprise, which it ALWAYS is.
Hence the members, in asserting what they perceive to be right and just ( which wasn't a problem when they ticked the box and signed up, having read the T&Cs), build a huge hill, on which the site ( or the communal part of it) eventually dies.
Oh and never underestimate the lurkers, who can form up to 70% of site traffic. Lurkers love a report button and they can press it with absolute anonymity.
So, IMO, as GN have repeatedly stated their position on this, those of you who continue to fight, are fighting a losing battle and building a burial ground for GN.