Poll: New forum rules - Yay or Nay?

[Canid117]

I also got warned for a picture I posted that was NOT pornography. Yes, it was racy, but it was FAR from porn.

That happened to me once too. You know that duct tape demotivational with the girl in her underwear sitting in a chair? That is porn apparently.

 

[SamuelT]

New rules? I'm posting here just to see these popups, and later edit something in to make this post not warning worthy.

Edit: Most things seem reasonable, though I think that 'no negative voiced opinions about the Escapist' is kinda harsh. Sure, I know alot of time goes into the site, and sure I know that mindless hate is just stupid, but I'm guessing people won't be warned for a similarly unadding comment if they love a certain aspect. "So true." or "Loved it."

I guess we'll see.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

The only thing I would add is that warnings go after a while (a long while, say 2 years). I got a probation about 2 years ago when I was much younger and dumber, I don't think that it should still be considered at all as it was so incredibly minor and so long ago.

 

[GeorgW]

Besides for the forum health meters, which I agree, are unfair, my main problem is the pedophilia one, actually. Mainly because they're lumping innocent people with scumbags. Pedophilia =/= child molester. There are pedophiles on here, and one actually got a ban or suspension for saying that he was, until they realized that it wasn't actually against the rules, or against US law, so they had to unpunish them. There are plenty of people who are sexually attracted to kids but know better than to actually act on it. I'm not "condoning" it, I'm just saying that there's a difference between pedophile and child molester, despite what the fear-mongering media wants you to think. However, if the pedophilia thing just means CP, fine, but say that.

If we find you being slanderous with regard to any part of The Escapist, you will be penalized. This includes, but is not limited to communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give The Escapist, an individual creator, advertiser, site sponsor, product, group, government or nation a negative image.

This, especially the bolded part, disturbs me. Exactly how far are they going to go to make sure that the advertisers and governments aren't being "slandered"?

So wait? I am never going to go from yellow to green again? Or was that just poorly written?

No, that's what they're saying.

snip

Hey GeorgW, nice to talk to you again. I'm quoting you to get your attention. Now that I have it, I'm sure you've read the rest of my post, but I'd like you to clarify, what does the pedophilia thing mean? Does it mean that people like LegendaryGamer0 can expect a banhammer visit soon, or is it just anti-CP?

I brought up the paedophile point when I first became a mod, that it should maybe be specified to child molester, but it was buried in like 50 other questions so I never got a response to that. I never brought it up again cuz it felt like such a silly little thing, but if you haven't already, maybe PM Spin about it. The way I see it though, is that being a paedophile and advocating it isn't the same thing, but I see how that's confusing.

I didn't realise it was that fucking hard to not be a dick. If you're that worried then you probably piss people off enough to deserve it...

Your use of 'you' here could be construed as offensive, because even in the general use of you it's a loaded word that obviously has a target of whoever is reading the post. You have one hard swear word and two mild swear words, your tone is accusatory and your post is only two short sentences long. Under the new rules I suspect that would be enough to get you reported.

I'm really really not trying to get you angry, or troll you, and I'm not going to report you, I'm just trying to point out how even what seems like the most innocuous of posts to you could be misread by anyone and reported. And unless the moderators are really on the ball (which I've never been entirely convinced about) then either everyone will get probations really quickly, or no one will report anyone.

And as for why i've never been entirely convinced of the moderator's alertness, because I know I'll have to justify that to avoid the banhammer. I've had three probations (that i can remember) that have been overturned because my original post wasn't actually offensive. When I've spoken to an admin and they've read it they've agreed that either it was misreported and the moderator never took the time to read it, or the moderator was overzealous. With this new system those mistakes will start getting people banned and probationed unfairly and unjustly, with no way to take back the mark against their record. And that isn't fair.

I can only speak for myself, but I always take context into consideration and make sure to make an informed decision before I do anything, and I'll be even more careful now that you're only allowed 8 strikes. In fact, I'd say I'm probably the most lenient of the mods, but I've still managed to give out some pretty severe punishments. So, you know, most of the time it's justly deserved. Also if you appeal the infraction and it gets removed, that bar of the health meter will also be removed, so the mark is not permanent if it wasn't just and you appeal it.
As for the post you quoted, it's aggressive, but not inflammatory and clearly a joke, so I would let that go. But that's just me, these things will always be subjective, there's no way around that, that's why we have an appeal system.

 

[Spinwhiz]

Besides for the forum health meters, which I agree, are unfair, my main problem is the pedophilia one, actually. Mainly because they're lumping innocent people with scumbags. Pedophilia =/= child molester. There are pedophiles on here, and one actually got a ban or suspension for saying that he was, until they realized that it wasn't actually against the rules, or against US law, so they had to unpunish them. There are plenty of people who are sexually attracted to kids but know better than to actually act on it. I'm not "condoning" it, I'm just saying that there's a difference between pedophile and child molester, despite what the fear-mongering media wants you to think. However, if the pedophilia thing just means CP, fine, but say that.

If we find you being slanderous with regard to any part of The Escapist, you will be penalized. This includes, but is not limited to communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give The Escapist, an individual creator, advertiser, site sponsor, product, group, government or nation a negative image.

This, especially the bolded part, disturbs me. Exactly how far are they going to go to make sure that the advertisers and governments aren't being "slandered"?

So wait? I am never going to go from yellow to green again? Or was that just poorly written?

No, that's what they're saying.

snip

Hey GeorgW, nice to talk to you again. I'm quoting you to get your attention. Now that I have it, I'm sure you've read the rest of my post, but I'd like you to clarify, what does the pedophilia thing mean? Does it mean that people like LegendaryGamer0 can expect a banhammer visit soon, or is it just anti-CP?

Exactly, thank you! So if I say "Apple you suck!" I get banned?

I'm going to take a wild guess and say "only if they're paying to advertise on here when you say it".

So the Review forum goes to Hell in a handbasket? Escapist is advertising Duke Nukem Forever. A random poster posts a review: "Duke Nukem SUCKED!" BAM! The Banhammer smites him!

No, not at all. If you say The Escapist is only previewing it because they are advertising, then you are going to be penalized, because that is slanderous.

How do we know if it's true or not? I find it difficult to take that mods can hand out warnings based on information THEY may know but common posters will NOT.

Easy, be able to back up what you say with fact or ask others who make statements to back them up. It's how a true debate actually works.

 

[Spinwhiz]

Don't care about the punishments but one thing that I see commonly on this website is people being told off for low content posts. Why not just set a lower limit for the number of characters in a post? Then that's one less thing the mods have to worry about and everyone's happy.

Good question. In regards to the other sites I frequent, most people just fill the extra character spaces with crap. We have no doubt members of The Escapist have lots to say, as most of the debates I see are spectacular and most opinions are well thought out and helpful.

Still, sometimes there's not much to say. What counts as low content?

"First", "LOL", an answer, a picture, a link...anything that doesn't take a brain cell to write. There is always more to write in order to advocate more discussion. If you want to answer someone's question, send them a PM.

Then please explain my Warning for a thread that had none of the above?

Send me a PM, I'd be happy to help.

 

[Futurenerd]

As for seeing warnings and probations get erased, currently it's not going to happen. We are holding people accountable for their actions and we feel 8 strikes is more than enough. 99.9% of the forum members don't have more than 2 warnings (if I'm not mistaken, 82% don't have any infractions). If people can't learn how to be respectful towards others and follow very simple rules, they won't be here for long. Everyone has a bad day but even off of the internet, if you do something stupid on that bad day, you are held accountable. The same goes for The Escapist forums.

I do agree with you, however I do feel it's a little harsh to NEVER forgive people for even the tiniest offenses.

 

[Ladette]

Hooray! I'm on permenant probation with no chance to get out of the yellow. So if I get a warning I instantly get suspended? Wonderous.

Not liking the health meter at all.

 

[HBaskerville]

People that own things do what they want with them. Rightfully the owners of this site don't want their community to post slanderous text about the people that advertise (ie. game companies, the US Govt, etc) on the site. So, if you do slander an advertiser, you get punished. The moderators will continue to make the judgement on what is a punishable offence.

There is nothing wrong with this. This is a business and they need to keep advertisers happy in order keep making money. They need to protect themselves. The old saying in politics is true: "You dance with the ones that brought you."

The "health" meter will have a chilling effect on specific discourse, which seems to be the reason they created it. I believe it will be an effective way to remind community members to temper their comments. As long as you temper your comments and keep strongly negative or controversial opinions to yourselves you will be fine.

 

[Actual]

Besides for the forum health meters, which I agree, are unfair, my main problem is the pedophilia one, actually. Mainly because they're lumping innocent people with scumbags. Pedophilia =/= child molester. There are pedophiles on here, and one actually got a ban or suspension for saying that he was, until they realized that it wasn't actually against the rules, or against US law, so they had to unpunish them. There are plenty of people who are sexually attracted to kids but know better than to actually act on it. I'm not "condoning" it, I'm just saying that there's a difference between pedophile and child molester, despite what the fear-mongering media wants you to think. However, if the pedophilia thing just means CP, fine, but say that.

If we find you being slanderous with regard to any part of The Escapist, you will be penalized. This includes, but is not limited to communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give The Escapist, an individual creator, advertiser, site sponsor, product, group, government or nation a negative image.

This, especially the bolded part, disturbs me. Exactly how far are they going to go to make sure that the advertisers and governments aren't being "slandered"?

So wait? I am never going to go from yellow to green again? Or was that just poorly written?

No, that's what they're saying.

snip

Hey GeorgW, nice to talk to you again. I'm quoting you to get your attention. Now that I have it, I'm sure you've read the rest of my post, but I'd like you to clarify, what does the pedophilia thing mean? Does it mean that people like LegendaryGamer0 can expect a banhammer visit soon, or is it just anti-CP?

Exactly, thank you! So if I say "Apple you suck!" I get banned?

I'm going to take a wild guess and say "only if they're paying to advertise on here when you say it".

So the Review forum goes to Hell in a handbasket? Escapist is advertising Duke Nukem Forever. A random poster posts a review: "Duke Nukem SUCKED!" BAM! The Banhammer smites him!

No, not at all. If you say The Escapist is only previewing it because they are advertising, then you are going to be penalized, because that is slanderous.

How do we know if it's true or not? I find it difficult to take that mods can hand out warnings based on information THEY may know but common posters will NOT.

If you don't know it to be true don't state it as fact.

I don't know for sure that Batman beat up a midget for making him feel uncomfortable, even though I believe he did. So I can't say "Batman beat up a midget for making him feel uncomfortable." that would be slanderous (libellous).

I can say "I believe Batman beat up a midget for making him feel uncomfortable", because it's clearly a belief not a fact. To state it as fact would be lying because I don't know it's a fact.

Batman's a ****.

 

[Canid117]

I also got warned for a picture I posted that was NOT pornography. Yes, it was racy, but it was FAR from porn.

That happened to me once too. You know that duct tape demotivational with the girl in her underwear sitting in a chair? That is porn apparently.

Wow, how kinky. The picture I posted wasn't porn AT ALL. It was racy to be sure, but nowhere NEAR porn. Thus, I find it rather harsh.

Yeah it seems that there is a very conservative mod on the escapist somewhere. Or at least one who hates the sight of womens underwear.

Also are we not allowed to voice our displeasure at Captchas anymore?

 

[Spinwhiz]

I find it rather unfair that there's absolutely no way to clear your record. Everybody slips up now and then. I'm usually the first to advocate harsh punishment for infractions, but this is ridiculous. With harsh punishments should come rewards for good behavior. So if you've not committed any infractions for a certain amount of time, your 'forum heath meter' should go back down.

Nobody should be able to slip up 8 times and being given more chances. If anyone can't learn how to be respectful and follow our rules after what is pretty much 8 infractions, they shouldn't be here.

Not even if the infractions are upwards of 6 months to year apart? Maybe even 2 years or more? 'Cause clearly if that's the case, that's not a person who's out to cause trouble; that's a person who just got a little carried away one day.

That is why we give 7 chances. Don't think I'm trying to push you, or anyone else, off either. I completely understand where you are coming from as we've had this discussion internally before we could even think about launching the new penalty system and updated rules (which has been months now). We just feel that we do give chances, 8 of them, and those who can not hold it together for The Escapist to have to tell someone 8 times that isn't how you behave is more than enough.

Ok, but what really gets me is I didn't get the four warnings and I'm already in the yellow zone. Under the old system I've received mod wrath, I think, 3 times, 1 probation, and 2 suspensions. I'm not going to pretend I didn't deserve them, 'cause I did. I let myself get carried away, what gets me is how does that translate into 5 warnings under the new system?
Edit: esp. since there's no chance for redemption.

Anyone with more than 2 probations (even suspensions) automatically received a yellow. Some people got lucky, having more than 2 suspensions and not getting a red automatically or even getting permabanned immediately. This would obviously be in bad taste, so we didn't do that. If you received 1 probation or less (warnings), you will be in the green. On a rare occasion where you had 4 or 5 warnings plus a probation, you will also be in the yellow probation category.

 

[Azmael Silverlance]

How many people have a health meter that looks like this? (or worse)

I do...and now i am scared to post anything really....

Yeah i just saw my profile page and i have the same exact thing. But im a very restricted poster on the forums. 90% of the time i post my opinions on the news articles that get posted here and thats it.
Ive only got 2 warning. and the 1st one was ages ago and the 2nd one because i bumped one thread taht i made since it got pushed down due to alot of posts in other threads.

This permanent thig sounds indeed very harsh. And also im in the publishers club.... X_X its not like we pay much for the bonuses but hey i dont wanna get banned.

 

[thethingthatlurks]

Ah...that's a bit of a tl;dr thing. Anyway, the "forum health" meter is a good idea in theory, but there are some major problems with it:
1) Everybody should start with a clean slate, as anything else amounts to double punishment.
2) Warnings should disappear after a while (say a month/warning), while probation should stay. The current system is also quite problematic as the definition of "low content post" is quite subjective. I'd hate having to add random fillers to my posts just to avoid a warning.
3) Really, adblocks should not be in the same category as piracy, which in turn should be nowhere near as severe as child porn. Yes, you guys are a business, and I fully understand that you lose money when people use adblocks here. But unlike piracy/child porn, there's nothing illegal about them.
4) Kindly read #1 again. Hint, hint, hintity, hint...

 

[Spinwhiz]

As for seeing warnings and probations get erased, currently it's not going to happen. We are holding people accountable for their actions and we feel 8 strikes is more than enough. 99.9% of the forum members don't have more than 2 warnings (if I'm not mistaken, 82% don't have any infractions). If people can't learn how to be respectful towards others and follow very simple rules, they won't be here for long. Everyone has a bad day but even off of the internet, if you do something stupid on that bad day, you are held accountable. The same goes for The Escapist forums.

I do agree with you, however I do feel it's a little harsh to NEVER forgive people for even the tiniest offenses.

That may change in the future BUT for now, everyone should think it isn't going to happen.

 

[mr.mystery]

does it really matter? just dont post anything negative regardless of the rule system. you should be a good person with or without being told to

You say that but a quick glance at your profile shows me that you've gotten two warnings within 2 months. It's not really about being a good person, it's quite easy to get a warning on this site. I've seen many people get put on probation for what I would consider to be nothing more than a joke, a funny one too. And if you're on this site for a few years they could really add up with their whole permanent nature.

hahahha do you know what those warnings are for? its for leaving comments with only two words.

q.e.d. "that sux"

 

[Inglip]

99.9% of the forum members don't have more than 2 warnings (if I'm not mistaken, 82% don't have any infractions).

These numbers mean nothing when you consider how many people have created accounts and then never posted or posted very little.

If people can't learn how to be respectful towards others and follow very simple rules, they won't be here for long. Everyone has a bad day but even off of the internet, if you do something stupid on that bad day, you are held accountable. The same goes for The Escapist forums.

So people should be judged based on their past mistakes, not on their present ones.

Also, why are warnings held against you. That's unbelievably unfair.

 

[Nazz3]

test to see forum rules

Edit: they seem to have gone rougher. That "once you receive probation, you'll always be on probation", does it mean that you'll always have that probation thing on your posts forever? Sounds kinda harsh. Oh well, still better than GameStop, I referred to the japanese people as 'japs' (not in any racist or whatever way) and got a warning for that. Hell they even have an automatic filter for swear words...

 

[googleback]

Gah! anybody got a health kit i'm pretty unhealthy over here!

I have a feeling this is going to penalise people who are occasionally rule breakers (such as myself) I've only been done a few times for things that are just funny. like ,y first was when they announced the last delay to Duke Nukem i posted this image as a joke;

I got a warning for low content post. my fault i get it but i wasn't exactly assaulting another poster was I?

focus on those people who attack others is all i'd say. I'm not above the rules but I would appreciate the occasional "slip up" not being penned the same as an act of aggression or slander...

 

[CarlMin]

How many people have a health meter that looks like this? (or worse)

That's what mine looks like.

I have had a lot of suspensions....

That's strange. I've only had one!