What would you like to see less or more of around here?

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, I really can't think of anything constructive I'd like to see more or less of, but maybe get some of the Escapists staff and/or community members to play some tabletop or card games, record it and show it off on the forums, perhaps. Give some games, other than video games, some other people might not have heard of some recognition, something like that. Might be neat if it can be accomplished.

Just some more cheerfulness and, perhaps some wackiness around the forums, in general. However, I'm going to make a thread here very soon to address that...
Now if you are talking about getting the staff to do things and film it .. there are so many more things we could make them do than table top games...
 

CrazyCapnMorgan

Is not insane, just crazy >:)
Jan 5, 2011
2,742
0
0
Lil devils x said:
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, I really can't think of anything constructive I'd like to see more or less of, but maybe get some of the Escapists staff and/or community members to play some tabletop or card games, record it and show it off on the forums, perhaps. Give some games, other than video games, some other people might not have heard of some recognition, something like that. Might be neat if it can be accomplished.

Just some more cheerfulness and, perhaps some wackiness around the forums, in general. However, I'm going to make a thread here very soon to address that...
Now if you are talking about getting the staff to do things and film it .. there are so many more things we could make them do than table top games...
While this is true, since this is a gaming website I thought I'd stick to, you know, games. Not those kind of games. However, I am all in favor of the Escapist staff doing a card game of Cards Against Humanity. Just to see what gets bleeped and what doesn't. >:)
 

PainInTheAssInternet

The Ship Magnificent
Dec 30, 2011
826
0
0
Corey Schaff said:
How about if the only person who can see how many likes a post has is the person who made the post?
I think that's a bad idea made redundant. At best, it's pointless. At worst (and what I consider more likely), people will be bragging or bitching about how many points they've got. It's best to just not foster an environment where imaginary internet points are in any way relevant.
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
Lil devils x said:
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
So, I really can't think of anything constructive I'd like to see more or less of, but maybe get some of the Escapists staff and/or community members to play some tabletop or card games, record it and show it off on the forums, perhaps. Give some games, other than video games, some other people might not have heard of some recognition, something like that. Might be neat if it can be accomplished.

Just some more cheerfulness and, perhaps some wackiness around the forums, in general. However, I'm going to make a thread here very soon to address that...
Now if you are talking about getting the staff to do things and film it .. there are so many more things we could make them do than table top games...
While this is true, since this is a gaming website I thought I'd stick to, you know, games. Not those kind of games. However, I am all in favor of the Escapist staff doing a card game of Cards Against Humanity. Just to see what gets bleeped and what doesn't. >:)
Aww so you don't want to see videos of them attempting to feed tigers wearing meat suits? I can watch my friends play table top games.. for me it is one of things you like to play, not watch, kind of like tennis.

EDIT: Now if the loser has to do something.. I will watch that.. XD
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
PainInTheAssInternet said:
Corey Schaff said:
How about if the only person who can see how many likes a post has is the person who made the post?
I think that's a bad idea made redundant. At best, it's pointless. At worst (and what I consider more likely), people will be bragging or bitching about how many points they've got. It's best to just not foster an environment where imaginary internet points are in any way relevant.
Yea, not a fan of the like system. Why would people need to know how many people liked their posts or not? Seems kind of feeding narcissism.
 

PainInTheAssInternet

The Ship Magnificent
Dec 30, 2011
826
0
0
Lil devils x said:
PainInTheAssInternet said:
Corey Schaff said:
How about if the only person who can see how many likes a post has is the person who made the post?
I think that's a bad idea made redundant. At best, it's pointless. At worst (and what I consider more likely), people will be bragging or bitching about how many points they've got. It's best to just not foster an environment where imaginary internet points are in any way relevant.
Yea, not a fan of the like system. Why would people need to know how many people liked their posts or not? Seems kind of feeding narcissism.
Or a persecution complex. I don't know how many times have I read on various sites "Downvote away, hivemind!"
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
PainInTheAssInternet said:
Lil devils x said:
PainInTheAssInternet said:
Corey Schaff said:
How about if the only person who can see how many likes a post has is the person who made the post?
I think that's a bad idea made redundant. At best, it's pointless. At worst (and what I consider more likely), people will be bragging or bitching about how many points they've got. It's best to just not foster an environment where imaginary internet points are in any way relevant.
Yea, not a fan of the like system. Why would people need to know how many people liked their posts or not? Seems kind of feeding narcissism.
Or a persecution complex. I don't know how many times have I read on various sites "Downvote away, hivemind!"
yea I would rather people just post because they are interested in talking about something, rather than worry about people liking/ disliking it. I see that as posting for the wrong reason if they are just posting to make people like it.

I prefer to just discuss what I want to discuss and care less if people like/ dislike/.. that isn't the point of having a discussion.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Barbas said:
Corey Schaff said:
I'd like the flagging system to require that you enter an explanation for why you're flagging something. It would allow for quicker moderation, especially on things where the reason might not be immediately apparent (Necro). Also would allow lower priority/higher dismissal rate on "spite flagging", which is more likely not to have a good explanation attached.
This has been suggested somewhere before and I. Would. Love it. It doesn't sound like it'd be that hard to implement, either.
Yeah, that has really bugged me. Especially on two occasions (that I know of, I guess) where I hit the button accidentally and I'm sure wasted someone's time.

As far as the site, I'd really like a current movie video reviewer. All we've got for current movies is an article format which just isn't cutting it for me as the format I want to use to get a movie review. Something like red letter media would be fantastic.

Natural 20 was a fantastic addition, so more strange/funny content like that would go a long way to ease the pain of losing LRR and the Firefilm videos.

Also, I know this is a bit simple, but it'd be nice to have a funny .gif article (list of .gifs) every week like Funny or Die provides. Just a simple thing anyone can throw together would be a nice touch.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here. On these forums, I have been told rape victims should not talk about rape, that women should allow themselves to be raped and not worry about it, that passed out women are okay to have sex with because they don't know it is happening, women are manipulative whores, that Native Americans should have assimilated a long time ago, that it doesn't matter if they are poisoning and killing Native Americans because they really do not matter, That Blacks are either college graduates or drug dealers, Blacks are criminals, among many other things that never were moderated.
Bigotry is intolerance of beliefs you disagree with. This comment is technically bigotry and would be removed under your regime's call for censorship of such things.

Allowing people to speak their beliefs even when potentially offensive isn't agreeing with their beliefs. It's just being an open forum for discussion. What a horrible fallacy you're committing by assuming otherwise. What a convenient rhetoric for censorious people to use that intolerance is only okay when they do it and that anyone who does or says otherwise needs to be censored.

Open and free discourse is necessary for the betterment of society. It allows new and challenging ideas to enter our space to be torn apart or adopted. Just because someone is saying a thing we find offensive does not make them wrong and allowing them to speak gives us the opportunity to correct them. If they never discuss it except in their own company then there is no opportunity for redemption and correction.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,903
752
118
Lightknight said:
Allowing people to speak their beliefs even when potentially offensive isn't agreeing with their beliefs.
It's agreeing with the belief that such beliefs are something the forum should have spoken on it.

Now, sure, it's the Escapist's Escapist, if they were to go "racism and sexism are fine with is", their site, they can do that. That really wouldn't be one of their better moves, however.

Lightknight said:
Open and free discourse is necessary for the betterment of society. It allows new and challenging ideas to enter our space to be torn apart or adopted. Just because someone is saying a thing we find offensive does not make them wrong and allowing them to speak gives us the opportunity to correct them. If they never discuss it except in their own company then there is no opportunity for redemption and correction.
The Escapist forums are not the totality of society. Nobody is talking about stopping people from being racist or sexist, they are talking about what may or may not be allowed on a privately owned forum.
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
Lightknight said:
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here. On these forums, I have been told rape victims should not talk about rape, that women should allow themselves to be raped and not worry about it, that passed out women are okay to have sex with because they don't know it is happening, women are manipulative whores, that Native Americans should have assimilated a long time ago, that it doesn't matter if they are poisoning and killing Native Americans because they really do not matter, That Blacks are either college graduates or drug dealers, Blacks are criminals, among many other things that never were moderated.
Bigotry is intolerance of beliefs you disagree with. This comment is technically bigotry and would be removed under your regime's call for censorship of such things.

Allowing people to speak their beliefs even when potentially offensive isn't agreeing with their beliefs. It's just being an open forum for discussion. What a horrible fallacy you're committing by assuming otherwise. What a convenient rhetoric for censorious people to use that intolerance is only okay when they do it and that anyone who does or says otherwise needs to be censored.
I disagree, allowing people to openly spread ignorance about others, whether it is their race, sex, gender, ethnic group, or religion not only enables these things to continue but also promotes these beliefs allowing them to be fostered in a way that is harmful to the groups being affected. It isn't just a matter of someone saying "Blacks are criminals" and it not harming someone. People are harmed by that belief because it is those beliefs that prevent blacks from being able to get jobs, have relationships, buy homes, have friendships, have access to the same resources as everyone else. The affects of these things actually impact the lives of the people they are being said about. Just as they do not allow people to directly insult someone, they should ALSO include racist, sexist, and other " hate speech" against races, genders, and sexes. It should be considered " hate speech" to say "blacks are either college graduates or drug dealers" because it is directly harmful to blacks to promote such things and their lives have been shown to be greatly impacted by this. Why would they not defend themselves against something that has repeatedly shown them actual harm in society? It is these ideas in society that has caused their persecution.

Not having something impact your life, does not mean that these things have not impacted the lives of others. Most places do not allow such things because they understand the actual impact this has on their community and society as whole.
 
Apr 24, 2008
3,912
0
0
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here.
You seem to want non-discussions, presumably moderated by people whom you completely agree with in their estimations of when sexism/racism/bigotry is occurring. Let's acknowledge how incredibly broad "bigotry" is. If we moderate anything that could fall under the umbrella of "bigotry", we shouldn't then act surprised when there's nobody left on the forum.

Just be honest and say that you want a hug-box for yourself and people who happen to agree with you.

Honestly, I think the general tone of the forum, as created by the more prolific posters is likely to be far more off-putting to new-users than an iffy opinion being expressed here and there (unless the target demographic is "whiny babies" that is). I know how often the community glad-hands itself, how often it places itself on a pedestal above all the other forums... But this isn't a place worth celebrating. It barely was before, it definitely isn't now. Unless you think passive-aggressive insults and snark are worth celebrating that is.
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
Sexual Harassment Panda said:
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here.
You seem to want non-discussions, presumably moderated by people whom you completely agree with in their estimations of when sexism/racism/bigotry is occurring. Let's acknowledge how incredibly broad "bigotry" is. If we moderate anything that could fall under the umbrella of "bigotry", we shouldn't then act surprised when there's nobody left on the forum.

Just be honest and say that you want a hug-box for yourself and people who happen to agree with you.

Honestly, I think the general tone of the forum, as created by the more prolific posters is likely to be far more off-putting to new-users than an iffy opinion being expressed here and there (unless the target demographic is "whiny babies" that is). I know how often the community glad-hands itself, how often it places itself on a pedestal above all the other forums... But this isn't a place worth celebrating. It barely was before, it definitely isn't now. Unless you think passive-aggressive insults and snark are worth celebrating that is.
Not at all, we can have discussions, but just as you are not allowed to insult someone directly, you should not also be allowed to insult someones race, gender, or sex as well, as you are actually insulting them. No one ever asked for a hug box, but the lines should be drawn somewhere otherwise this would be no better than stormfront. I wasn't aware that " blacks are criminals" was of discussion value? It is no more of discussion value than "men are rapists". That is not providing discussion value, that is just spreading ignorance. Why would it be necessary to insult people to have a discussion on the subject? Men not all wanting to be called rapist do not make them " whiny babies" no more than it makes blacks not wanting to be called " drug dealers". The difference though between those two statements, however, the widespread ignorant belief that " blacks are drug dealers" has actually cost people jobs, homes, relationships, friendships... where as most people know saying something like "men are rapist" is just ridiculous.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
thaluikhain said:
Lightknight said:
Allowing people to speak their beliefs even when potentially offensive isn't agreeing with their beliefs.
It's agreeing with the belief that such beliefs are something the forum should have spoken on it.

Now, sure, it's the Escapist's Escapist, if they were to go "racism and sexism are fine with is", their site, they can do that. That really wouldn't be one of their better moves, however.
It depends on exactly what they mean. The site already doesn't condone rudeness. So the question becomes what they mean by racist or sexist talk? Is sexism just pointing out that we are a sexually dimorphic species with varying attributes along the gender line or is it merely telling someone who is just entering a valid conversation that they should go back to the kitchen? The former being legitimate discussion but one that does discriminate by gender intellectually whereas the latter would already be banned here.

Is racism pointing out that different races could potentially have other differences just like any species that has evolved in different regions of the world or is it calling someone the N-word? Again, the former being a legitimate form of discourse while while the latter is outright insult and already banned here.

So what is the purpose being had here for the Escapist to change if direct insults are already banned and catch what one would already usually think is worthy of it? Is it to ban those "formers" too? Or is it just an vague comment meaning nothing at the end of the day since rules are already in place?

The Escapist forums are not the totality of society. Nobody is talking about stopping people from being racist or sexist, they are talking about what may or may not be allowed on a privately owned forum.
I didn't say otherwise. The individual made the claim that if you allow free speech in your domain then you are then culpable for what is said and even tacitly in agreement with anything said, including racism for example. That isn't true in any stretch of the imagination. The only implicit truth to be gained from a society or privately owned forum enforcing freedom of speech is that they believe in freedom of speech.
 
Apr 24, 2008
3,912
0
0
Lil devils x said:
Sexual Harassment Panda said:
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here.
You seem to want non-discussions, presumably moderated by people whom you completely agree with in their estimations of when sexism/racism/bigotry is occurring. Let's acknowledge how incredibly broad "bigotry" is. If we moderate anything that could fall under the umbrella of "bigotry", we shouldn't then act surprised when there's nobody left on the forum.

Just be honest and say that you want a hug-box for yourself and people who happen to agree with you.

Honestly, I think the general tone of the forum, as created by the more prolific posters is likely to be far more off-putting to new-users than an iffy opinion being expressed here and there (unless the target demographic is "whiny babies" that is). I know how often the community glad-hands itself, how often it places itself on a pedestal above all the other forums... But this isn't a place worth celebrating. It barely was before, it definitely isn't now. Unless you think passive-aggressive insults and snark are worth celebrating that is.
not at all, we can have discussions, but just as you are not allowed to insult someone directly, you should not also be allowed to insult someones race, gender, or sex as well, as you are actually insulting them. No one ever asked for a hug box, but the lines should be drawn somewhere otherwise this would be no better than stormfront.
Ok. Willing to have a crack at drawing these lines in a way that doesn't rely on definitions that people disagree on, and that won't lead to people being even more unhappy with the moderation than they already are?
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
Lightknight said:
thaluikhain said:
Lightknight said:
Allowing people to speak their beliefs even when potentially offensive isn't agreeing with their beliefs.
It's agreeing with the belief that such beliefs are something the forum should have spoken on it.

Now, sure, it's the Escapist's Escapist, if they were to go "racism and sexism are fine with is", their site, they can do that. That really wouldn't be one of their better moves, however.
It depends on exactly what they mean. The site already doesn't condone rudeness. So the question becomes what they mean by racist or sexist talk? Is sexism just pointing out that we are a sexually dimorphic species with varying attributes along the gender line or is it merely telling someone who is just entering a valid conversation that they should go back to the kitchen? The former being legitimate discussion but one that does discriminate by gender intellectually whereas the latter would already be banned here.

Is racism pointing out that different races could potentially have other differences just like any species that has evolved in different regions of the world or is it calling someone the N-word? Again, the former being a legitimate form of discourse while while the latter is outright insult and already banned here.

So what is the purpose being had here for the Escapist to change if direct insults are already banned and catch what one would already usually think is worthy of it? Is it to ban those "formers" too? Or is it just an vague comment meaning nothing at the end of the day since rules are already in place?

The Escapist forums are not the totality of society. Nobody is talking about stopping people from being racist or sexist, they are talking about what may or may not be allowed on a privately owned forum.
I didn't say otherwise. The individual made the claim that if you allow free speech in your domain then you are then culpable for what is said and even tacitly in agreement with anything said, including racism for example. That isn't true in any stretch of the imagination. The only implicit truth to be gained from a society or privately owned forum enforcing freedom of speech is that they believe in freedom of speech.
It is what is and is not considered " rudeness". Why would " Anime fans are obsessive" be considered rude but " blacks are criminals" would not be? That isn't adding anything to the conversation other than spreading ignorance and directly insulting them.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Lil devils x said:
Lightknight said:
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here. On these forums, I have been told rape victims should not talk about rape, that women should allow themselves to be raped and not worry about it, that passed out women are okay to have sex with because they don't know it is happening, women are manipulative whores, that Native Americans should have assimilated a long time ago, that it doesn't matter if they are poisoning and killing Native Americans because they really do not matter, That Blacks are either college graduates or drug dealers, Blacks are criminals, among many other things that never were moderated.
Bigotry is intolerance of beliefs you disagree with. This comment is technically bigotry and would be removed under your regime's call for censorship of such things.

Allowing people to speak their beliefs even when potentially offensive isn't agreeing with their beliefs. It's just being an open forum for discussion. What a horrible fallacy you're committing by assuming otherwise. What a convenient rhetoric for censorious people to use that intolerance is only okay when they do it and that anyone who does or says otherwise needs to be censored.
I disagree, allowing people to openly spread ignorance about others, whether it is their race, sex, gender, ethnic group, or religion not only enables these things to continue but also promotes these beliefs allowing them to be fostered in a way that is harmful to the groups being affected.
Who gets to decide what is ignorance and what is legitimate? Organizations who moved to do what you are advocating here also burned people at the stake for claiming the Earth wasn't the center of the universe. You are just perpetuating historical persecution of beliefs when so many things are subjective. So many things are called racism or sexism when they aren't, not really. The idea that women are different from men in a sexually dimorphic species isn't wrong and the concept that humans who evolved in different regions of the world may have differences beyond just skin tone isn't unbelievable either when looking at so many other examples in the animal kingdom. The discussion of the notions is potentially inflammatory and could easily be called racism/sexism when they could just as easily be scientific inquiry seeking to discover and praise the natural unique strengths/weakenesses/differences our diverse hominid group expresses.

It isn't just a matter of someone saying "Blacks are criminals" and it not harming someone.
What about someone stating that black culture disproportionately encourages criminal behaviors/activities? Would you have that censored along with the person saying "Blacks are criminals" or would the former be spared by some sort of logic you haven't yet conveyed? Because the former is social commentary on a problem that does exist and needs to be addressed whereas the latter is a vague stereotype putting everyone in the same box.

What's more is that the only reason why the comment that they are criminals is harmful is because that is born out in the numbers. However, once someone presents that then you then have the opportunity to show them that their demographic's crime statistic is in line with the crime statistics of the poor and that such a disproportionate amount of crime can be more easily tied to equality gap than color of skin.

Again, you are robbing discourse on a commonly held belief that can lead to enlightenment. Do you honestly believe that people are coming into that discussion thinking that black people don't commit more crime? Most people either agree or disagree and so it only serves to benefit us when the truth may be presented eloquently for all to see.

In being afraid of lies, you are disowning the presentation of truth. That is of no benefit to anyone.
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
Sexual Harassment Panda said:
Lil devils x said:
Sexual Harassment Panda said:
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here.
You seem to want non-discussions, presumably moderated by people whom you completely agree with in their estimations of when sexism/racism/bigotry is occurring. Let's acknowledge how incredibly broad "bigotry" is. If we moderate anything that could fall under the umbrella of "bigotry", we shouldn't then act surprised when there's nobody left on the forum.

Just be honest and say that you want a hug-box for yourself and people who happen to agree with you.

Honestly, I think the general tone of the forum, as created by the more prolific posters is likely to be far more off-putting to new-users than an iffy opinion being expressed here and there (unless the target demographic is "whiny babies" that is). I know how often the community glad-hands itself, how often it places itself on a pedestal above all the other forums... But this isn't a place worth celebrating. It barely was before, it definitely isn't now. Unless you think passive-aggressive insults and snark are worth celebrating that is.
not at all, we can have discussions, but just as you are not allowed to insult someone directly, you should not also be allowed to insult someones race, gender, or sex as well, as you are actually insulting them. No one ever asked for a hug box, but the lines should be drawn somewhere otherwise this would be no better than stormfront.
Ok. Willing to have a crack at drawing these lines in a way that doesn't rely on definitions that people disagree on, and that won't lead to people being even more unhappy with the moderation than they already are?
They do not have to give a warning/ ban for every post they moderate. Other sites remove the offensive material with a " mod edit" and an explanation without having to ban all the users unless that user doesn't let it go.
Insulting/ spreading ignorance a persons race, gender, and sex should be included in with the "Don't be a jerk" rules.
Saying things like " girls are attention whore", " Blacks are drug dealers", "gays are pedophiles" or anything ignorant about people should be considered under the "Don't be a jerk" rules. Most sites do not allow for people to promote hate speech, not sure why this one would promote it.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Lil devils x said:
Sexual Harassment Panda said:
Lil devils x said:
Sexual Harassment Panda said:
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here.
You seem to want non-discussions, presumably moderated by people whom you completely agree with in their estimations of when sexism/racism/bigotry is occurring. Let's acknowledge how incredibly broad "bigotry" is. If we moderate anything that could fall under the umbrella of "bigotry", we shouldn't then act surprised when there's nobody left on the forum.

Just be honest and say that you want a hug-box for yourself and people who happen to agree with you.

Honestly, I think the general tone of the forum, as created by the more prolific posters is likely to be far more off-putting to new-users than an iffy opinion being expressed here and there (unless the target demographic is "whiny babies" that is). I know how often the community glad-hands itself, how often it places itself on a pedestal above all the other forums... But this isn't a place worth celebrating. It barely was before, it definitely isn't now. Unless you think passive-aggressive insults and snark are worth celebrating that is.
not at all, we can have discussions, but just as you are not allowed to insult someone directly, you should not also be allowed to insult someones race, gender, or sex as well, as you are actually insulting them. No one ever asked for a hug box, but the lines should be drawn somewhere otherwise this would be no better than stormfront.
Ok. Willing to have a crack at drawing these lines in a way that doesn't rely on definitions that people disagree on, and that won't lead to people being even more unhappy with the moderation than they already are?
They do not have to give a warning/ ban for every post they moderate. Other sites remove the offensive material with a " mod edit" and an explanation without having to ban all the users unless that user doesn't let it go.
Insulting/ spreading ignorance a persons race, gender, and sex should be included in with the "Don't be a jerk" rules.
Saying things like " girls are attention whore", " Blacks are drug dealers", "gays are pedophiles" or anything ignorant about people should be considered under the "Don't be a jerk" rules. Most sites do not allow for people to promote hate speech, not sure why this one would promote it.
Hate speech is when you advocate violence against a group. You're misusing terms here.
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
Lightknight said:
Lil devils x said:
Lightknight said:
Lil devils x said:
The Lunatic said:
I'd just be happy with the forums featuring less SJWs passive aggressive berating people for "Wrongthink".

Generally, the forums would be improved if we actually did something about the members who've been 1-2 warnings away from getting banned for like a year and yet have never changed their attitude.
I would rather just see racist, sexist or bigoted statements moderated so that people wouldn't have to say something. If you allow people to just say racist, sexist or bigoted statements all over your forums, your forums ARE racists, sexist and bigoted and unwelcoming to those who those statements are bigoted against. When you allow such things to run rampant, you are telling people they are not welcome here. On these forums, I have been told rape victims should not talk about rape, that women should allow themselves to be raped and not worry about it, that passed out women are okay to have sex with because they don't know it is happening, women are manipulative whores, that Native Americans should have assimilated a long time ago, that it doesn't matter if they are poisoning and killing Native Americans because they really do not matter, That Blacks are either college graduates or drug dealers, Blacks are criminals, among many other things that never were moderated.
Bigotry is intolerance of beliefs you disagree with. This comment is technically bigotry and would be removed under your regime's call for censorship of such things.

Allowing people to speak their beliefs even when potentially offensive isn't agreeing with their beliefs. It's just being an open forum for discussion. What a horrible fallacy you're committing by assuming otherwise. What a convenient rhetoric for censorious people to use that intolerance is only okay when they do it and that anyone who does or says otherwise needs to be censored.
I disagree, allowing people to openly spread ignorance about others, whether it is their race, sex, gender, ethnic group, or religion not only enables these things to continue but also promotes these beliefs allowing them to be fostered in a way that is harmful to the groups being affected.
Who gets to decide what is ignorance and what is legitimate? Organizations who moved to do what you are advocating here also burned people at the stake for claiming the Earth wasn't the center of the universe. You are just perpetuating historical persecution of beliefs when so many things are subjective. So many things are called racism or sexism when they aren't, not really. The idea that women are different from men in a sexually dimorphic species isn't wrong and the concept that humans who evolved in different regions of the world may have differences beyond just skin tone isn't unbelievable either when looking at so many other examples in the animal kingdom. The discussion of the notions is potentially inflammatory and could easily be called racism/sexism when they could just as easily be scientific inquiry seeking to discover and praise the natural unique strengths/weakenesses/differences our diverse hominid group expresses.

It isn't just a matter of someone saying "Blacks are criminals" and it not harming someone.
What about someone stating that black culture disproportionately encourages criminal behaviors/activities? Would you have that censored along with the person saying "Blacks are criminals" or would the former be spared by some sort of logic you haven't yet conveyed? Because the former is social commentary on a problem that does exist and needs to be addressed whereas the latter is a vague stereotype putting everyone in the same box.

What's more is that the only reason why the comment that they are criminals is harmful is because that is born out in the numbers. However, once someone presents that then you then have the opportunity to show them that their demographic's crime statistic is in line with the crime statistics of the poor and that such a disproportionate amount of crime can be more easily tied to equality gap than color of skin.

Again, you are robbing discourse on a commonly held belief that can lead to enlightenment. Do you honestly believe that people are coming into that discussion thinking that black people don't commit more crime? Most people either agree or disagree and so it only serves to benefit us when the truth may be presented eloquently for all to see.

In being afraid of lies, you are disowning the presentation of truth. That is of no benefit to anyone.
I am not talking about the " historical persecution" I am talking about the impact this has on people TODAY. Racist, sexist antigay sentiment is causing persecution TODAY. This is what is affecting their daily lives, people sure as hell should not have to come onto the forums to deal with that nonsense as well. Unless of course you think they should not be allowed to feel comfortable here as well. When we talk about making a community inclusive, that means not promoting ignorant misinformed beliefs about people in the community.

No I am not having a discussion about something so ignorant as attempting to equate " black culture" to "culture of poverty" because they are two different things and there is no criminal relation to actual " black culture". It is no more related than " white culture" promoting criminal behavior.