Poll: New forum rules - Yay or Nay?

[Leg End]

As for me, I'm all for these new rules for the forums.

Same here. The only people that need to be worried about it are those who are unable to tell the difference between "having a possibly controversial opinion" and "expressing a controversial opinion the way a complete cockmeister might." If you can't engage in a civil disagreement, a discussion forum is far, far out of your depth.

Or, you know, people who are being punished ONLINE for saying things unseen people ONLINE don't like. It's like it's suddenly turned into Nazi Germany here (my personal opinion, I am not comparing the Escapist to Hitler's regime and I am also not saying someone is Hitler). This is not cops vs. robbers. We're all gamers and now IMHO you're turning it into "crimes." It's ONLINE. It's supposed to be FUN. Where's the FUN in this?

You're right. It's only "online." So why are you getting so serious over your rights on a board like this? I have to put up with jackasses and douchebags in real life. Online is supposed to be my escape from that. Why should I have to put up with them ONLINE, too? Where's the FUN in that?

Did an Escapist contributor just imply I am a "jackass" or "douchebag?" MODS! He slandered me; please ban his ass forever!

Eh, possibly. :L

Hard to tell, I'm sleepy as all hell. >.>

 

[Buizel91]

The "On Probation forever" thing is stupid, and the fact the health meter doesn't reset itself if you have been good, other than that i can cope.

Also, when i have 2 warnings? :| i can only remember 1 and that was like last year!

EDIT: I have actually just looked through my messages...only 1 warning notice...

Escapist Mods...explain why you say i have 2 when clearly in my messages i only have 1?

 

[LightspeedJack]

The bar needs to drain over time or something.

Otherwise, I really have no major issues with the bar itself existing.

Outside of the non-content related bans. Suspensions for repeat minor infractions? Fine. Bans? Not fine.

Yep, this means I will definitley be banned at some point because I get moderated for stuff I just don't understand so I will enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[Dastardly]

Did an Escapist contributor just imply I am a "jackass" or "douchebag?" MODS! He slandered me; please ban his ass forever!

Good luck trying to spin that little yarn. I wasn't aware that you were making this something personal--which, by the way, is usually the fastest way to draw mod wrath, if you're keeping score here.

You seem to think people should be allowed to act like jackasses and douchebags (which are really the only behaviors that get modded besides clear policy violations), because otherwise forums are not "fun." I've simply countered with equal-but-opposite reasoning: to me, if I can't come here to get away from people acting like that, the forums are not "fun."

Historically, I've found that there are more people out there who want to avoid that sort of behavior than there are people that need to exhibit that sort of behavior. Clearly, the folks tasked with moderating this forum found the same thing. That's why the rules favor those who feel there's more "fun" in not having to put up with that crap.

 

[JoJo]

Actually, it has little to do with the current subject. XD

Though, it is still the Pro to what that is to Anti.
n
Might take a while to find it, with the time to find and the fact that my computer is utter shite. >.>

Meh, I'll still look at it.

Well, if you want someplace quick(and this being a place that I also disagree with on several issues, including motivations), try Newgon. Google shall take you there.

Eh, here is to hoping I don't get banned for that. (=_=)

Uggghhh... just looked at that site, wish I hadn't now, feel like I'm about to be sick. I really hope you don't believe that...

As I said, I disagree with them on several issues. :L

Alright... well no offence but considering some of their claims I don't think they're a very good example of "pro-pedo", all I could see were a load of disgusting justifications for child abuse, though I didn't stick around long. That makes it impossible for me to take anything else they say seriously, if they've already abandoned such an evident truth.

 

[TriGGeR_HaPPy]

As for me, I'm all for these new rules for the forums.

Same here. The only people that need to be worried about it are those who are unable to tell the difference between "having a possibly controversial opinion" and "expressing a controversial opinion the way a complete cockmeister might." If you can't engage in a civil disagreement, a discussion forum is far, far out of your depth.

Or, you know, people who are being punished ONLINE for saying things unseen people ONLINE don't like. It's like it's suddenly turned into Nazi Germany here (my personal opinion, I am not comparing the Escapist to Hitler's regime and I am also not saying someone is Hitler). This is not cops vs. robbers. We're all gamers and now IMHO you're turning it into "crimes." It's ONLINE. It's supposed to be FUN. Where's the FUN in this?

You're right. It's only "online." So why are you getting so serious over your rights on a board like this? I have to put up with jackasses and douchebags in real life. Online is supposed to be my escape from that. Why should I have to put up with them ONLINE, too? Where's the FUN in that?

Did an Escapist contributor just imply I am a "jackass" or "douchebag?" MODS! He slandered me; please ban his ass forever!

I'll bite the bullet here:

1) No. From how I read it, he was saying that the rules are good, because they stop people from turning into jackasses and/or douchebags online, since he gets enough of that outside the net. He wasn't saying anything about you personally.

2) If you're actually offended, I'll repeat this: "Report and move on".

I'm going to use your response as a springboard into another example that's been bugging me. This isn't a personal attack, just a thought that I'd like to share, which your post helped me get into.

If someone starts getting cruel, you don't respond unless you know you can respond in a civil manner. If you respond in this way, then it will either quickly be revealed that the guy is trolling/extremely emotional (either way is their fault for posting in that state), or you'll calm them back down. I've done this several times, and except when the other person has had an extremely emotional day, we've always ended up finding some common ground we both agree on, and neither one of us has to face repercussions. Quite a few times, we've even ended up as friends on this site.
If you can't do this, you're just putting yourself at risk. Not because the mods have a thing where they enjoy hurting the victim, but because the victim ends up incriminating themselves (usually more than the original poster), because they start getting emotional about being "attacked" online.

 

[Mandalore_15]

Strikes should expire after a while. It'd be too easy to get banned month or even years after a few incidents after a long time of good behaviour.

 

[Trolldor]

Did an Escapist contributor just imply I am a "jackass" or "douchebag?" MODS! He slandered me; please ban his ass forever!

Good luck trying to spin that little yarn. I wasn't aware that you were making this something personal--which, by the way, is usually the fastest way to draw mod wrath, if you're keeping score here.

You seem to think people should be allowed to act like jackasses and douchebags (which are really the only behaviors that get modded besides clear policy violations), because otherwise forums are not "fun." I've simply countered with equal-but-opposite reasoning: to me, if I can't come here to get away from people acting like that, the forums are not "fun."

Historically, I've found that there are more people out there who want to avoid that sort of behavior than there are people that need to exhibit that sort of behavior. Clearly, the folks tasked with moderating this forum found the same thing. That's why the rules favor those who feel there's more "fun" in not having to put up with that crap.

Who decides who qualifies under those categories?
The mods.
Are the mods gods of objectivity?
No.
So why do these qualify as reasons for mod wrath if anybody can see how vulnerable it is to exploitation?
A mod doesn't like your opinion you're an asshole worthy of moderation - as my first issued probation so brilliant displays.
The system is flawed because it relies on the idea that the mods can not and will never make mistakes.
And to say otherwise is to ignore that all the decisions are permanent with a fixed point system. If the mods fuck up its on your permanent record and you're one point closer to a permanent ban. Not all appeals will succeed.
This is why you have expiries on your record, to allow mods to act while still implementing a system that accomodates both extended good behaviour and mod mistakes.

 

[mb16]

I find this system annoying due to one of my "hateful" comments from ages back, wasnt hateful at all in my eyes. It was when i posted in a thread that Mechas weren't proper mechs (i wont go into details why), but i was wanting a debate on the topic (not an argument). I then come back and see i have been warned for this post?!

And now as i made a post that was seen as "hateful" i have 2 left warnings without negative consequences.

Also knowing my luck i will be warned for this post

 

[Leg End]

Actually, it has little to do with the current subject. XD

Though, it is still the Pro to what that is to Anti.
n
Might take a while to find it, with the time to find and the fact that my computer is utter shite. >.>

Meh, I'll still look at it.

Well, if you want someplace quick(and this being a place that I also disagree with on several issues, including motivations), try Newgon. Google shall take you there.

Eh, here is to hoping I don't get banned for that. (=_=)

Uggghhh... just looked at that site, wish I hadn't now, feel like I'm about to be sick. I really hope you don't believe that...

As I said, I disagree with them on several issues. :L

Alright... well no offence but considering some of their claims I don't think they're a very good example of "pro-pedo", all I could see were a load of disgusting justifications for child abuse, though I didn't stick around long. That makes it impossible for me to take anything else they say seriously, if they've already abandoned such an evident truth.

Good point. :L

Wait, "evident truth"? That referring to the fact that they are like NAMbLA, but worse? XD

 

[Dastardly]

Who decides who qualifies under those categories?
The mods.
Are the mods gods of objectivity?
No.
So why do these qualify as reasons for mod wrath if anybody can see how vulnerable it is to exploitation?
A mod doesn't like your opinion you're an asshole worthy of moderation - as my first issued probation so brilliant displays.
The system is flawed because it relies on the idea that the mods can not and will never make mistakes.
And to say otherwise is to ignore that all the decisions are permanent with a fixed point system. If the mods fuck up its on your permanent record and you're one point closer to a permanent ban. Not all appeals will succeed.
This is why you have expiries on your record, to allow mods to act while still implementing a system that accomodates both extended good behaviour and mod mistakes.

I don't disagree with you that it's harsh. I don't personally know any of the mods, and I've never interacted with them on the forums, so I can't say whether I believe them to be paragons of good or not. Yeah, a permanent system leaves little room for error, though there is still a process to appeal the decision.

My disagreement, in the post that you quoted, is with people who think that policing this kind of behavior is about killing "fun." From what I've seen here, as regards warnings/probations/etc., the mods are pretty consistent about the things they'll moderate. Tons of people on here have controversial opinions or... non-standard personalities, and they get on just fine.

If you can express an opinion without personally attacking another poster--meaning you discuss the issue, rather than the person posting it--you're in good shape. If you're not admitting to illegal activity, or advocating it by posting links to help others engage in it, you're good, too. If you make sure you don't just post two word image-macro replies, or posting tons of videos without the "spoiler" tag to aid people with slow connections, you're going to be just fine.

But there are some folks that just can't resist turning an argument personal. They can just say, "Here are the reasons I disagree with your opinion." Or even "I think that opinion is entirely unfounded, and it relies on some of the dumbest, most ignorant logic I've ever encountered." Instead, they just have to say, "You're stupid, dumb, and ignorant. And that's why I'm right!" There's a world of difference between the two, and some people can't seem to understand that difference. Mature discussion just isn't for them, at this point in their lives.

Mostly, though, I take issue that some people think this forum should be designed for the "I can't have fun unless I'm allowed to insult/flame/troll people whenever and however I want" sort of people. There are already plenty of forums for them. This isn't (and in my opinion shouldn't be) one of them.

 

[Trolldor]

Funnily enough, if the system has always been in place then they've always had a shit system relying on a perfect moderation team which does not exist.

 

[Trolldor]

OH! I do have a question:

The rules say no trolling, but also no accusations of trolling.
Does this mean that mods will have to fully explain justifications for any action issued for a member's apparent trolling?
And if an appeal is successful, can the mod recieve a warning for a false accusation?

 

[JoJo]

Actually, it has little to do with the current subject. XD

Though, it is still the Pro to what that is to Anti.
n
Might take a while to find it, with the time to find and the fact that my computer is utter shite. >.>

Meh, I'll still look at it.

Well, if you want someplace quick(and this being a place that I also disagree with on several issues, including motivations), try Newgon. Google shall take you there.

Eh, here is to hoping I don't get banned for that. (=_=)

Uggghhh... just looked at that site, wish I hadn't now, feel like I'm about to be sick. I really hope you don't believe that...

As I said, I disagree with them on several issues. :L

Alright... well no offence but considering some of their claims I don't think they're a very good example of "pro-pedo", all I could see were a load of disgusting justifications for child abuse, though I didn't stick around long. That makes it impossible for me to take anything else they say seriously, if they've already abandoned such an evident truth.

Good point. :L

Wait, "evident truth"? That referring to the fact that they are like NAMbLA, but worse? XD

Precisely, there's no way I can accept evidence from people who try to justify hurting innocent children for their own pleasure by pretending that they are doing for the child's sake... if they are willing to ignore the masses of scientific evidence about child abuse then I see no reason to believe anything they claim is valid.

(Also, if you're wondering why I have temporially MasterOfWorlds avatar, that's because I've just made it for him and this is the quickest way to get it to him)

 

[TriGGeR_HaPPy]

OH! I do have a question:

The rules say no trolling, but also no accusations of trolling.
Does this mean that mods will have to fully explain justifications for any action issued for a member's apparent trolling?
And if an appeal is successful, can the mod recieve a warning for a false accusation?

That's like asking if a police officer arrests a man because he's acting drunk, but the man wasn't drunk and was released shortly after his sobriety has been proven, should the officer have to serve the man's sentence in the drunk tank.
Which, while it's an interesting and oddly humorous question, has an obvious answer in this day and age: no.

The mods will be alerted to trolls via the users pressing the report button. If a number of users press it, then the mods will get there quicker and try to deal with it asap. If they feel that the post is an "inflammatory, extraneous or off-topic message with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion", then they're allowed to take action on the spot.
If you're the one (not actually you, Trolldor, but anyone reading this) whose post has been brought to the attention of the mods, you can appeal. If it really was just a misunderstanding, or you just happened to post without articulating what you mean to post properly, the mark will be removed.

If you really want to ask about their reasons for thinking your post was in troll-fashion, you can feel free to ask over PM. But, as to if they should take the hit that you narrowly missed, well... Refer to the paragraphs above.

 

[Dastardly]

Ever hear of a little something called sarcasm? Yeah it's fun. Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn if you had called me that.

EDIT I don't want people acting like jackasses I just want to have a fucking good time, something your new rules is making hard to do. I could say something else but won't because I'd get banned...

Why do you keep calling them "your new rules?" I don't work here, mate. I'm just a guy who wrote an article once. You know. For fun.

As for the rest of it, I'm just having trouble understanding how these rules really make it so hard to enjoy these forums. I enjoy the hell out of them, personally. I don't even have trouble tossing some good-natured insults back and forth with other forum members that I don't know personally--because the site has a consistently friendly tone to it, thanks to the moderation.

Of course, there are plenty of less-moderated forums out there for people that need that kind of fun. I think those of us that don't should have a place to go, too. The Escapist is that place.

 

[Macgyvercas]

There are new rules? I will look into this matter.

EDIT:
So, I've always had problems with their don't be a jerk rule - when someone's an idiot, they're an idiot.

What worries me most is this:
"Similarly, posts including, advocating, or linking to illegal or adult material are a very quick way to end your time as part of The Escapist community. An example of these are:
Piracy
Ad Blockers
Illegal Drugs in the United States
Illegal Acts in the United States
Pedophilia
Pornography
Sexist, Racist or Perverted Remarks"
They can't include that? We can't mention piracy or illegal acts? Or porn? I doubt they mean it that way, but it gives them a lot of wiggle room that shouldn't be there. The way I'm reading this bans the entire political forum off the bat.

All political threads consist of those items up there only? Wow, I'm scared now.

Seriously though, we've always punished for those things, even before these rules were put into place. We've just made it easier to understand.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the previous rules on those topics something along the lines of "You can have discussions and share your opinions about about them, but don't explicitly advocate their use"? I could be wrong though. And what does this mean now, are we not allowed to talk about them at all, because I have seen of pretty interesting debates the first three on that list. Or is it the standard "Discuss, don't advocate" fare?

EDIT: Please ignore. I didn't see your response to someone else when I posted this.

 

[CrazyGirl17]

I'm... a bt iffy about the whole "health bar" deal. I mean, I know what they're getting at, but it seems a bit... much.

Or maybe that's just my paranoia acting up again...

 

[ynotgriff]

i had no idea, seems like they should have sent people messages or something.

 

[Virgil]

Also, the little part underneath the meter that calls me a citizen..I find it hilarious. Makes me think of 1984.

I was going for Robocop, but 1984 works too