The Escapist Community is a tad too toxic

[Olas]

I'll admit I've been less frequent on this site as of late, so I'm not the best to be diagnosing any general trends, but let me give a little common sense wisdom.

If the forums are getting more toxic it's because of poor moderation. Any toxic behavior should be met with a warning and continual warnings lead to banning.

If you're talking about people being generally more meanspirited and argumentative. Well, that might be leftover fallout from the GG shitstorm last year and the ongoing culture wars, or maybe not, I don't know. But frankly I don't mind it and I wouldn't call it "toxic". People should be allowed to be passionate and even a little unpolite when discussing an important topic, and as long as it doesn't lead to verbal abuse or personal insults (which are against the rules) it seems fine to me.

 

[maninahat]

And I know we both remember the `Would you hit a woman if she hit you first threads`- where people would come from far and wide to explain in detail how they would theoretically beat the crap out of this theoretical woman if she theoretically dared to raise and hand to them first. Theoretically of course.

I think the people from those threads might have migrated to somewhere else

There were all sorts of awfulness. Back then, raising a concern about something meant I was "over-sensitive" (SJW hadn't been invented yet). Fake nerd girls were a big thing. Before then, it was furious arguments about piracy (remember when that was the big thing? I don't think I've seen a piracy related thread in ages).

 

[Lightknight]

I didn't say you said it "Should". I was objecting to your implication that it would be a "good" action.

Nowhere did I imply that, I made no value judgments. I simply said it would work. Throwing the Westboro Baptist Church in prison for the rest of their lives would also be an effective way of stopping their shit. I never said or implied that it was "good". One of the primary costs of freedom is that some people will use that freedom to be a complete asshole. Its up to individuals to decide for themselves if a certain level of freedom is worth the impending use of that freedom by being an asshole or not. Those in charge of the forum rules for The Escapist decided to not allow people the freedom to use their platform to advocate (or otherwise really even talk about in any substantial manner) AdBlock on the basis that they think such a freedom would be abused, presumably that members on the forum would advocate using adblock on the site and cut into its income.

There are all kinds of arguments people have had over time. Feminism has also had its moments of toxicity and pages of arguments. Should we have considered banning their discussions because it led to contempt sometimes?

It would certainly work. Bans people from speaking on a platform tends to keep them from speaking on that platform.

So by your logic, any particularly inflammatory discussions should be censored and that just isn't reasonable.

Again, I stress, I never advocated anything. I just said that it would work. Shooting a dog will certainly get it to stop barking, just because I recognize that doesn't mean I advocate for that action.

Ok, so you aren't saying it you say it would work. Work to accomplish what? An iron-fist rule? Would we also ban anyone who starts any kind of argument at all? Does this mean we also need to eliminate discussions and only permit like minded people to join the circle jerk?

Who decides what the "platforms" are? Isn't disliking a game a sort of "platform". How about disliking Fee to Pay games? That's a platform.

If the goal is to shut down communication, then yeah, mission accomplished. Might as well shut down the internet too.

More likely you've just described a totalitarian moderation scenario in which whoever is in charge just gets to squash whatever platform they don't personally agree with.

 

[Blazing Hero]

My two cents is that if you are not liking a conversation or fight happening you should simply go to another topic. I haven't even read the last few pages here and can guess that some of the usual suspects on both side of GG are going after each others in the later pages. Nothing new there and it honestly doesn't bother me that it happens since I can just ignore it and move on. In a few years from now the conflict in the gaming sphere will die down when inevitably the two sides get bored of fighting each other. I don't see the gaming medium as a whole changing much to move toward either side anyway so all of this just comes off as white noise to me. I am fine with the current state of the industry.

 

[Sylveria]

So, I've been coming to the escapist site since back in '09 and I've noticed that the community has been becoming progressively more uppity and hostile over the years. I've encountered insults and snarky comments in many of my own posts but lately I've been seeing it throughout most forums. Take for example

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.881615-Ms-Marvel-Vol-1-won-Hugo-award-really

A thread in which the OP made a comment about Ms.Marvel Vol. 1 winning the Hugo award. I clicked on the thread because I read Ms. Marvel and while I like the book it should not have beaten (opinion) its competition for the Hugo award. Instead of a discussion about the merits and faults of the comic everyone latched on to the last sentence of the OP's remark about why he/she thought Ms.Marvel won. Half of the commentors clearly hadn't even read Ms.Marvel, yet felt compelled to be the loudest ones in the room. The whole discussion dissolved into a series of quips about diversity instead of a discussion about Ms.Marvel.

I find that to be the source of the toxicity. An OP posing a question, or making a statement, and the majority of posters latching onto one sentence that they personally take issue with. They ignore the rest of the OP, or more often the main point, in order to focus on something irrelevant to the discussion as a whole. I could find more examples but your already on the site. Just look around.

I remember when the forums here were an oppressive dictatorship. It was around when Sarkeesian's first video came out and the general tone of the forums was "don't question it or be subject to suspensions and bans." I completely avoided The Escapist for a long time because I do not want to be in a community where ideology takes precedent over discussion.

My point is, if we're talking about the 'health' of the forums, its better off being a place were people can talk semi-openly even if they may be subject to heated and potentially unpleasant disagreement. You claim of toxicity seems to be based on you didn't like how people to exception with an aspect of the article rather than discussing the entirety of it. An aspect that was completely factual, mind you. The Hugo award judges have admitted that their decisions were ideology based, rather than any on any even semi-objective measure of quality. People felt that was the most important part of that event to discuss, so they discussed it. You not liking that does not mean it was 'toxicity.'

You are illustrating an issue with internet culture lately.. words losing all meaning. Everything is sexist, everything is racist, everything is rape, and everything is toxic. Someone below you stated that an attempt to be more inclusive has just scared people off. That's the reality of being inclusive. Inclusive means accepting everyone, but most people don't want actual inclusivity, they want a safe space. If a community is actually inclusive, it's going to be rough, because you're going to get a lot of people with wildly differing opinions and attitudes.

 

[Ricardo Lima]

Has this forum turned in Toxicity Olyimpics where eryone pretends the other is winning?

 

[Colour Scientist]

Really? Because I've been openly critical of Sarkeesian's work from the get go, getting into many arguments with her supporters and I don't think any of my warnings came from that. Most of them came during GG. Got called a misogynist by some of her more ardent supporters but never got any warnings.

Is she still relevant?!


Oh dear Gott in Himmel.

 

[DementedSheep]

So, I've been coming to the escapist site since back in '09 and I've noticed that the community has been becoming progressively more uppity and hostile over the years. I've encountered insults and snarky comments in many of my own posts but lately I've been seeing it throughout most forums. Take for example

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.881615-Ms-Marvel-Vol-1-won-Hugo-award-really

A thread in which the OP made a comment about Ms.Marvel Vol. 1 winning the Hugo award. I clicked on the thread because I read Ms. Marvel and while I like the book it should not have beaten (opinion) its competition for the Hugo award. Instead of a discussion about the merits and faults of the comic everyone latched on to the last sentence of the OP's remark about why he/she thought Ms.Marvel won. Half of the commentors clearly hadn't even read Ms.Marvel, yet felt compelled to be the loudest ones in the room. The whole discussion dissolved into a series of quips about diversity instead of a discussion about Ms.Marvel.

I find that to be the source of the toxicity. An OP posing a question, or making a statement, and the majority of posters latching onto one sentence that they personally take issue with. They ignore the rest of the OP, or more often the main point, in order to focus on something irrelevant to the discussion as a whole. I could find more examples but your already on the site. Just look around.

I remember when the forums here were an oppressive dictatorship. It was around when Sarkeesian's first video came out and the general tone of the forums was "don't question it or be subject to suspensions and bans." I completely avoided The Escapist for a long time because I do not want to be in a community where ideology takes precedent over discussion.

What are you talking about? I am honestly confused as how you could ever reach that conclusion. That never happened. 90% of the threads about Anita were started by people who hate her and often from those who would openly admit and even brag that they never watched her videos and are instead were raging and arguing against a summary that was written by people who hate her. Most the responses were form people who despise her and people who don't really like her but were sick of the constant shit talking about her and outrage threads every time she said something, especially when it was from shit she never said or from reading a lot into one statement. The second group got steadily bigger because the flood of threads about her was getting very annoying. We have very few people who are actually Anita fans here (and don't just agree that there is a problem) or don't question her and you do not get banned from disagreeing with her. The bans in those threads where because because people got nasty about it.

 

[IceForce]

How can 'SJWs' "get people banned"? I mean, unless you're calling the moderators 'SJWs', that is...

Actually, the rules are worded in such a way that an 'SJW' could start an argument and anybody on the opposite side would in infraction of the rules by default.

"-Offensive Posts
-Please read what you wrote before you post it and think if anyone else could find it offensive."
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct

So pretty much any arguments against inclusivity and equality could be considered offensive to the group excluded and thus would be an infraction.

Oh yes, I'm well aware of that rule. It's been in the COC for years.

There's also a clause in there about insulting "groups who may visit The Escapist", but it doesn't elaborate on which groups exactly are off-limits.
Am I allowed to insult prison inmates?, what about rapists?, or child molesters?. Potentially all these could well be "groups" who "may" visit The Escapist, but I would hope no one would be moderated for insulting them.

And that's the problem with the COC, it's soooo poorly worded that almost any opinion with any teeth to it would be moderated off this forum, if the rules were followed as they're written.

 

[Tilly]

No, it's not toxic. This is one of the best moderated forums I've been on for penalizing people for just injecting nastiness into conversations. Being disagreed with doesn't count and is normal and healthy.

That's kinda like victim blaming isn't it?

If you can extend the concept of victimhood to being disagreed with on a forum, you can extend it to anything and everyone in the world is a victim, in every situation. In fact, you might well have victimized me by not knowing in advance that I would strongly dislike your comment.

 

[sniddy_v1legacy]

I found it latched onto a certain 'issue' lost it's focus and drew that kinda personage....

It's gotten better, but I fear may have lost too much and may never fully recover

 

[ChaoGuy2006]

The biggest reason this all happens is Gamergate.
Because the Escapist (rightfully so) fixed it's ethics policy, I an assume those against Gamergate were quite upset. Now this is merely an observation, but I have noticed more topics relating to gender/race/sexuality. Now, this could be because people desire an honest discussion on it, or (the more cynical approach) those seeking to split the community into extremes ("Progressiveness" even at the cost of quality Vs. Freedom of art even at the cost of political correctness).

Whether it's bait using hot-button topics to get people to argue instead of discuss, bait to attract people who become offended when you present another point of view, everyone on tentahooks fearing the person is the antithesis of what they hate in the community, or just poor timing all around, something is certainly happening.

And the mods can't do anything about it. Hell, the mods shouldn't do anything about it. With the exception of outright insults, all discussion should be allowed to happen, even if some of the people participating do it wrong. Everyone has a different ideal of what's debate, and what's an argument. And because of that, it has to be the community to decide. If someone presents a flawed argument, refute it entirely. If you can't, ignore them. Then, if the refuted person presents a decent counter argument, you have a good discussion. If the person continues to use flawed logic or devolves into arguing, ignore them. You gain nothing by entertaining an idiot.

I don't think the community is being co-opted by SJWs. But, it can't hurt just to be extra vigilant in the quality of the community. You should never tolerate a community becoming idiots.

 

[Belaam]

Couldn't agree more. Used to come here multiple times a day; now its a couple of times a month.

I'd recommend checking out GG's list of banned and boycotted sites. There's a couple of blithering idiots on there, but also a few rather outstanding sites. Plus, you get the irony of GG driving you to more liberal sites than you used to visit.

Four of my most visited sites (per Chrome suggestions) are sites that I'd never even visited (or in two cases heard of) a year ago before the all the forum idiots went nuts and the main site pushed out/lost 90% of its interesting content.

 

[SolidState]

Speaking as someone who is relatively new to this site, I have to say, this forum is hostile as hell to new people. That might be why you're not getting the intake of new users you usually get.

I find the moderation to be frankly bizarre. The rules don't stop hostility and vitriol (which they've clearly been written and designed to do), they just cause everyone to be more clever and passive-aggressive with their hostility.
And I personally find this to be MORE annoying than any actual direct insults. I would much rather just be called an insult directly by someone, rather than have them take passive-aggressive snipes at me. It's sly and snide and incredibly annoying.

 

[Sansha]

I find the moderation to be frankly bizarre. The rules don't stop hostility and vitriol (which they've clearly been written and designed to do), they just cause everyone to be more clever and passive-aggressive with their hostility.

This I totally agree with. I've noticed an increasing amount of intellectually elitist quips and snipes, cleverly stepping around directly insulting someone by being condescending and rude. And none of the moderators seem to notice.

Moreso, I lost a lot of interest in so much as following the forums after Escapists found themselves incapable of ceasing pointless, repetitive discussion about SJW's and 'video game politics/issues' a while back.

I've started looking back into it now that that garbage seems to have finally been hauled away, but the lack of moderation towards what is obvious flame-baiting is repelling me again.

 

[Josh123914]

[
At this point if Macris had a clue what he was doing, he'd either kill off the forums as the obvious dead weight it is and focus on the content this site just does NOT have...

...or just keep dong what they're doing, which will have the same result.

Joined: 25 August 2015.

Mind sharing what has makes you a sudden expert of the forums?

 

[Josh123914]

[
At this point if Macris had a clue what he was doing, he'd either kill off the forums as the obvious dead weight it is and focus on the content this site just does NOT have...

...or just keep dong what they're doing, which will have the same result.

Joined: 25 August 2015.

Mind sharing what has makes you a sudden expert of the forums?

I do this cool thing called "Reading", and all of you spend a lot of time complaining about a very few people and things. This thread and the other recently locked ones are basically expert level courses in Escapist dysfunction. Beyond that I think I mentioned doing an informal survey of my own looking at a bunch of banned users from the last year, and you read a lot of crap doing that.

In all, it lead me to some strong conclusions in a short period of time. It's a little forum after all, not a numerical solution to the N-Body Problem.

How long did this informal survey take? Of the banned users did you notice a change in atmosphere or wording of posts? I ask this because I checked some old threads last week and noticed that (for example) about two dozen people had gotten themselves banned through talking to what is now known as a banjumper. Those same accounts were present in the earliest Gamergate threads making their points with others on the forum, and racked up very few warnings.
Now, this is all anecdotal evidence from both of us, but if you seriously believe there's an issue with the current form of forum moderation, and the solution is more constructive than "Shut it down", tell the site.