I appreciate you show us this. I know moderating can't be an easy job, and I hope that this ind of stuff can stop, because you guys shouldn't have to go through all this without it making a difference.
While I can't give an example of the content of inappropriate posts, I can give you an idea of what we have to deal with on the moderation s… moreide of things. This is a screenshot from an actual problematic thread that received a lot of flags and was reported, both by regular users and among the moderation team (the names and icons of the posters in question have been removed, as have posts that weren't flagged, for privacy reasons): Also, note that flagging removes all threaded posts underneath the flagged post, so it's likely that there are even more problematic posts posted after the initial post that's been flagged.
Regular users don't see that, as the forum just doesn't show the posts at all to people without moderator privileges. But that's what the moderators have to deal with in heated threads. The stricter moderation rules that Blind Sniper suggested would hopefully put a stop to that, as otherwise, these types of threads would have to continue to be closed when they get past that point.
We're pretty much just going in circles here, but I'll give a response anyway.
The thing is it's not just one or two posts of people who make a post before it gets closed, it's a lot of posts.
I'm sure this is the case in some instances, but it has not always been the case. I have already provided an example of that, with that being the transgender thread I had linked earlier. One single person posting some debatably poor taste in humor was enough to put an end to that one with one single post. The thread was relatively new, and I had been actively participating in it at the time, so I know there were no other posts removed.
Also, just because there may be a number of flagged comments made by various users, that doesn't mean those comments were worthy of being flagged.
Sometimes those posts have insulting wording like I mentioned above that can be interpreted as being insulting by people who don't speak English as a first language or those who interpret things literally
Like I said in regards to this in my last post, I'm not advocating for insults in any form. An insult is an insult. Either someone is being malicious or they're not. That said, we again need to be objective in what is actually an insult and what is not. That's where the difference is. That's why I'm having this conversation at all, if that wasn't already clear. I understand that there may be a number of perceived insults, and as I have said from the very beginning, this is due to some people being oversensitive to differing opinions on subjects that they are passionate about. Not to personally criticize or anything, but I think the mods have been guilty of this as well, which is why we have people like Kenny/Lee getting banned, no matter the fact that they were civil and 100% well intending in their explanation of their moral viewpoint. I feel like this has extended to threads as well.
But often, people don't see the insulting posts because they are flagged and removed from public view. It's only after tons of insulting posts are made, flagged and removed or not, that we close the threads. And these types of insulting posts pile up a lot in threads about controversial social issues. If we were to agree to make these threads with these kind of strict rules in place, it would be to try to stop these threads from getting tons of comments of this kind in the first place (since the first post in any thread like this would spell out specifically that posts like this will be removed and bans will be made). If it works, great, I'd be happy to let a thread like that continue under those circumstances.
I'm not exactly a stranger to being around these types of threads, and I have never really seen this to be true, with maybe rare exception. Again, people are too easily insulted over these topics, and they need to find a way to not take other's viewpoints so personally, especially when they are not meant to me taken in that way. For example, saying that transgendered individuals are confused and need help instead of enablement is not an insult though I'm sure some people would love to take it that way. Just a random example, but I think you know what I'm getting at it. It's not the same thing as a personal attack. As far as personal attacks go (and ones that are even worth mentioning), I believe those are not really all that prevalent, certainly not so that it takes over a thread or dominates the discussion. If someone does go over the line and legitimately personally attacks someone for their point of view, then that can be addressed individually.
It's not right to single out people, by giving specific examples of people who have broken the rules, especially if those examples have been removed from public viewing (which would fall under privacy rights, which is akin to the reason why we don't allow discussion of banned members)
How can anyone ever know why a thread is closed unless that is explained? I don't see why that is seen as some big issue of privacy. A simple explanation of why a thread is getting closed isn't asking much. If you want to keep the names of posters out of it, I think that can rather easily be worked around.
The thing is it's not just one or two posts of people who make a post before it gets closed, it's a lot of posts. Sometimes those posts hav… moree insulting wording like I mentioned above that can be interpreted as being insulting by people who don't speak English as a first language or those who interpret things literally (like saying everyone who does a certain act is immoral or unnatural, rather than just stating an opinion without calling making insulting labels about people from other cultures, or calling someone a bigot, racist, or homophobe for their views). But often, people don't see the insulting posts because they are flagged and removed from public view. It's only after tons of insulting posts are made, flagged and removed or not, that we close the threads. And these types of insulting posts pile up a lot in threads about controversial social issues.
If we were to agree to make these threads with these kind of strict rules in pla… [view original content]
You guys are doing amazing work in these threads. I've been thoroughly disgusted by some of the posts that stay up. I can't imagine the ones that get nuked. If I were a mod, I would probably have just banned social justice threads by now.
While I can't give an example of the content of inappropriate posts, I can give you an idea of what we have to deal with on the moderation s… moreide of things. This is a screenshot from an actual problematic thread that received a lot of flags and was reported, both by regular users and among the moderation team (the names and icons of the posters in question have been removed, as have posts that weren't flagged, for privacy reasons): Also, note that flagging removes all threaded posts underneath the flagged post, so it's likely that there are even more problematic posts posted after the initial post that's been flagged.
Regular users don't see that, as the forum just doesn't show the posts at all to people without moderator privileges. But that's what the moderators have to deal with in heated threads. The stricter moderation rules that Blind Sniper suggested would hopefully put a stop to that, as otherwise, these types of threads would have to continue to be closed when they get past that point.
As I said, posts are removed from threads, so people who are moderators don't see them, so there's always a case of people thinking that only one bad thing was said and the thread was locked, but this is not the case (plus, there are plenty of instances of language that insults cultures (using similar language to that which Blind Sniper and I have pointed out to be problematic) in all of the threads that you mentioned, even among the posts that are still there.
Regardless of whether some people think that other people are being offended too easily by posts that insult people or insult people's cultures, the point is that they are being offended by these posts, and we can't have that. What is said on the forums reflects Telltale as a company, and they can't have comments on the forums that insult people, as they are supposed to be a welcoming place for gamers of all backgrounds. The Telltale forums aren't about freedom of speech, they are about discussing Telltale's games.
Telltale allows discussion of other topics, but only if they fall within the rules they set forth for their website. The Telltale terms of use forbids any post that "includes content that is patently offensive to the online community". Posts that have insults towards other cultures absolutely are "patently offensive to the online community", since we receive a lot of complaints about them, so they can't be allowed. We get tons of notifications through flags for posts like these, so we have to take care of them.
As I said, there's absolutely ways to debate without using offensive language (and it works, as carefully worded posts about controversial opinions without insults towards other cultures never get flagged, so they're not seen as offensive). However, very few people actually word their posts without any type of insult towards other people (either when posting a controversial opinion, or replying to one) on these forums. That's the hope that increased moderation rules will cause people to think more carefully before they post, as we can't allow people to make posts that many people find offensive. The terms of use are clear that we can't allow that to happen.
Moderators can't actually cite specific examples of problematic posts when closing threads, even without mentioning names, as even if the posts have been flagged and removed, the posts were up at one point, and people might have seen them, leading to the possibility of people getting harassed through PMs due to people thinking they were the cause of the thread closure if we actually post the content of the post that was removed (we've had plenty of people contacting us for help from private message harassment, so this is well within of the realm of possibility). The only thing that could be stated is that offending posts were removed and the thread is being closed for lack of respect (and I've stated that exact wording before in closing threads). We can't do any more than that.
We're pretty much just going in circles here, but I'll give a response anyway.
The thing is it's not just one or two posts of people w… moreho make a post before it gets closed, it's a lot of posts.
I'm sure this is the case in some instances, but it has not always been the case. I have already provided an example of that, with that being the transgender thread I had linked earlier. One single person posting some debatably poor taste in humor was enough to put an end to that one with one single post. The thread was relatively new, and I had been actively participating in it at the time, so I know there were no other posts removed.
Also, just because there may be a number of flagged comments made by various users, that doesn't mean those comments were worthy of being flagged.
Sometimes those posts have insulting wording like I mentioned above that can be interpreted as being insulting by people who don't speak English as a fir… [view original content]
Let me ask you, as a moderator, was my post offensive in any way, shape, or form?
How would you rate it?
Anything of value that stood out to you in particular, both good and bad!
I know you were joking, but just to give a serious response, we don't have a problem with people discussing social issues or anything seriou… mores that isn't about video games.
We just don't want people derailing threads with personal attacks over arguments, and we don't want people posting racist/homophobic/otherwise hateful comments. Being offended because of somebody having another opinion is vastly different from being offended because somebody personally attacked you, and we focus mostly on keeping the latter from happening. When we flag posts, it is because people got carried away with their arguments and derailed the discussion into something worse with personal insults, bigoted posts, etc. People can disagree with each other in a civil, constructive manner that doesn't derail threads, resort to personal attacks, or come off as bigoted/hateful/discriminatory.
As I said, posts are removed from threads, so people who are moderators don't see them, so there's always a case of people thinking that only one bad thing was said and the thread was locked, but this is not the case
I did respond to this to this in my last post, sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I had once again said that people (mods included) are not always objective in deciding what a legitimate insult is and what is not. This is especially true in regards to sensitive topics. I have already given examples of this. As I had said earlier, I understand that you all have to make judgement calls on these things, but I simply would like for moderators to take a closer look at what is actually an insult and what is not, while also reconsidering the reflex of closing threads when things start to get a little edgy.
We keep going back and forth here, but that is really all that I have been saying from the start. I don't think there is a very negative atmosphere on this forum. At the very least, I have noticed absolutely no difference in the atmosphere between the time that I joined, all the way through to now. It gets blown out of proportion.
Regardless of whether some people think that other people are being offended too easily by posts that insult people or insult people's cultures, the point is that they are being offended by these posts, and we can't have that.
Well in that case, your post offends me and I think you should delete it. I don't like that you have a difference of opinion.
See how ridiculous that line of thought is? This is why we need to have objectivity in looking at what is actually an insult and what is not (again, this is my main argument). How sad and delusional is our society that we have to censor ourselves like this? It's genuinely pathetic.
Telltale allows discussion of other topics, but only if they fall within the rules they set forth for their website.
I understand that. We have been discussing those rules for pretty much the entirety of this conversation.
As I said, there's absolutely ways to debate without using offensive language
I have never disagreed with this. Again, it's about being reasonable in what is actually "offensive language" and what is not.
However, very few people actually word their posts without any type of insult towards other people (either when posting a controversial opinion, or replying to one) on these forums.
I simply do not believe that.
Moderators can't actually cite specific examples of problematic posts when closing threads, even without mentioning names, as even if the posts have been flagged and removed, the posts were up at one point, and people might have seen them, leading to the possibility of people getting harassed through PMs due to people thinking they were the cause of the thread closure if we actually post the content of the post that was removed (we've had plenty of people contacting us for help from private message harassment, so this is well within of the realm of possibility). The only thing that could be stated is that offending posts were removed and the thread is being closed for lack of respect (and I've stated that exact wording before in closing threads).
Alright, well, that rule doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me considering I think informing other posters with specific examples of where the line needs to be drawn outweighs the minor likelihood of a banned user receiving harassment (which can obviously be dealt with in turn). Anyway though, it would still be good to at least have a reason stated. That hasn't always been done.
As I said, posts are removed from threads, so people who are moderators don't see them, so there's always a case of people thinking that onl… morey one bad thing was said and the thread was locked, but this is not the case (plus, there are plenty of instances of language that insults cultures (using similar language to that which Blind Sniper and I have pointed out to be problematic) in all of the threads that you mentioned, even among the posts that are still there.
Regardless of whether some people think that other people are being offended too easily by posts that insult people or insult people's cultures, the point is that they are being offended by these posts, and we can't have that. What is said on the forums reflects Telltale as a company, and they can't have comments on the forums that insult people, as they are supposed to be a welcoming place for gamers of all backgrounds. The Telltale forums aren't about freedom of speech, they are… [view original content]
We keep going back and forth here, but that is really all that I have been saying from the start. I don't think there is a very negative atmosphere on this forum. At the very least, I have noticed absolutely no difference in the atmosphere between the time that I joined, all the way through to now. It gets blown out of proportion.
Not from the posts that stay up, but we've flagged some pretty offensive posts. When we lock threads, it's usually because the amount of effort we put in flagging posts and banning users (or any other form of individual punishment) outweighs the amount of civil and constructive discussion going on.
Well in that case, your post offends me and I think you should delete it. I don't like that you have a difference of opinion.
See how ridiculous that line of thought is? This is why we need to have objectivity in looking at what is actually an insult and what is not (again, this is my main argument). How sad and delusional is our society that we have to censor ourselves like this? It's genuinely pathetic.
I covered that earlier;
Previous quote of mine: Being offended because of somebody having another opinion is vastly different from being offended because somebody personally attacked you, and we focus mostly on keeping the latter from happening. When we flag posts, it is because people got carried away with their arguments and derailed the discussion into something worse with personal insults, bigoted posts, etc. People can disagree with each other in a civil, constructive manner that doesn't derail threads, resort to personal attacks, or come off as bigoted/hateful/discriminatory.
As I said, posts are removed from threads, so people who are moderators don't see them, so there's always a case of people thinking that onl… morey one bad thing was said and the thread was locked, but this is not the case
I did respond to this to this in my last post, sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I had once again said that people (mods included) are not always objective in deciding what a legitimate insult is and what is not. This is especially true in regards to sensitive topics. I have already given examples of this. As I had said earlier, I understand that you all have to make judgement calls on these things, but I simply would like for moderators to take a closer look at what is actually an insult and what is not, while also reconsidering the reflex of closing threads when things start to get a little edgy.
We keep going back and forth here, but that is really all that I have been saying from the start. I don't think there is a v… [view original content]
I've already responded to all of this, and I honestly don't want to have to keep repeating myself, so I'll just let my previous post answer this one. Not sure if you read all of it, but it answers the things that you have said here.
All in all I think you understand my point of view on this. Like was said when we first ended this conversation, I hope you can keep that point of view in mind when making judgement calls in the future. That's all I'm asking for, coupled with wanting people to be less sensitive in general.
We keep going back and forth here, but that is really all that I have been saying from the start. I don't think there is a very negative atm… moreosphere on this forum. At the very least, I have noticed absolutely no difference in the atmosphere between the time that I joined, all the way through to now. It gets blown out of proportion.
Not from the posts that stay up, but we've flagged some pretty offensive posts. When we lock threads, it's usually because the amount of effort we put in flagging posts and banning users (or any other form of individual punishment) outweighs the amount of civil and constructive discussion going on.
Well in that case, your post offends me and I think you should delete it. I don't like that you have a difference of opinion.
See how ridiculous that line of thought is? This is why we need to have objectivity in looking at what is actually an insult and what is not (again, this is my main argument). … [view original content]
I did respond to this to this in my last post, sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I had once again said that people (mods included) are not always objective in deciding what a legitimate insult is and what is not.
The real problem is that people post insults without thinking. They use words that they wouldn't use if they were surrounded by people from the culture that they were against in real life, and that's the problem. People talk about how there is more a politically correct atmosphere today, and that's only because the internet has opened the entire world up to what you say. You no longer have a small group of people that you are talking to, now everyone from every walk of life can read them, and if you say something that is insulting towards them or their culture, they understandably get offended. People need to be more careful what they post. A good rule of thumb is that if you were in a group of people in real life that were from the culture that you were against and you think that what you would say would cause you physical harm, don't say it online.
As I said, posts are removed from threads, so people who are moderators don't see them, so there's always a case of people thinking that onl… morey one bad thing was said and the thread was locked, but this is not the case
I did respond to this to this in my last post, sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I had once again said that people (mods included) are not always objective in deciding what a legitimate insult is and what is not. This is especially true in regards to sensitive topics. I have already given examples of this. As I had said earlier, I understand that you all have to make judgement calls on these things, but I simply would like for moderators to take a closer look at what is actually an insult and what is not, while also reconsidering the reflex of closing threads when things start to get a little edgy.
We keep going back and forth here, but that is really all that I have been saying from the start. I don't think there is a v… [view original content]
I did respond to this to this in my last post, sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I had once again said that people (mods included) are not alw… moreays objective in deciding what a legitimate insult is and what is not.
The real problem is that people post insults without thinking. They use words that they wouldn't use if they were surrounded by people from the culture that they were against in real life, and that's the problem. People talk about how there is more a politically correct atmosphere today, and that's only because the internet has opened the entire world up to what you say. You no longer have a small group of people that you are talking to, now everyone from every walk of life can read them, and if you say something that is insulting towards them or their culture, they understandably get offended. People need to be more careful what they post. A good rule of thumb is that if you were in a group of people in real life that wer… [view original content]
Do you know who else also did that? Pretty much every nation in history. The only difference was the severity of this censorship. What is having a thread on a forum closed compared to having yourself and your entire family vanished in the night?
All in all I think you understand my point of view on this. Like was said when we first ended this conversation, I hope you can keep that point of view in mind when making judgement calls in the future. That's all I'm asking for, coupled with wanting people to be less sensitive in general.
I understand, you want us to have more objective/consistent standards in how we handle threads that discuss social issues prior to locking them while still allowing people to exchange dissenting opinions and views. I just wanted to point out a few things, but ignoring that, I think we're mostly on the same page as you said. Other mods and I are taking this feedback into consideration and trying to figure out how to better keep things in order.
I've already responded to all of this, and I honestly don't want to have to keep repeating myself, so I'll just let my previous post answer … morethis one. Not sure if you read all of it, but it answers the things that you have said here.
All in all I think you understand my point of view on this. Like was said when we first ended this conversation, I hope you can keep that point of view in mind when making judgement calls in the future. That's all I'm asking for, coupled with wanting people to be less sensitive in general.
Other mods and I are taking this feedback into consideration and trying to figure out how to better keep things in order.
Sounds good, and thanks for doing that. I know I sort of said it before, but I'm definitely not trying to sound like I'm ripping on the overall job that you all do. I would say that you guys do a good job. Just thought I'd express some thoughts on this particular issue.
All in all I think you understand my point of view on this. Like was said when we first ended this conversation, I hope you can keep that po… moreint of view in mind when making judgement calls in the future. That's all I'm asking for, coupled with wanting people to be less sensitive in general.
I understand, you want us to have more objective/consistent standards in how we handle threads that discuss social issues prior to locking them while still allowing people to exchange dissenting opinions and views. I just wanted to point out a few things, but ignoring that, I think we're mostly on the same page as you said. Other mods and I are taking this feedback into consideration and trying to figure out how to better keep things in order.
Don't worry, I understand - it's nothing personal and I totally get that you guys want to use this community section for something more than video games. I think most of it was us getting stuck on some semantics, but as I said, we've taking this feedback into consideration and are working towards trying to articulate some set standards in how people discuss various issues.
Other mods and I are taking this feedback into consideration and trying to figure out how to better keep things in order.
Sounds goo… mored, and thanks for doing that. I know I sort of said it before, but I'm definitely not trying to sound like I'm ripping on the overall job that you all do. I would say that you guys do a good job. Just thought I'd express some thoughts on this particular issue.
What is having a thread on a forum closed compared to having yourself and your entire family vanished in the night?
Nothing, my point was that the motive, regardless of the method, was the same; no challenge to someone's agenda. Just pointing out a fact. I personally, don't want any of ours goals as a society to mirror that of the Nazi regime, but part of free speech is allowing speech that angers us, no matter how absurd or harsh it may sound.
Do you know who else also did that? Pretty much every nation in history. The only difference was the severity of this censorship. What is having a thread on a forum closed compared to having yourself and your entire family vanished in the night?
What is having a thread on a forum closed compared to having yourself and your entire family vanished in the night?
Nothing, my poin… moret was that the motive, regardless of the method, was the same; no challenge to someone's agenda. Just pointing out a fact. I personally, don't want any of ours goals as a society to mirror that of the Nazi regime, but part of free speech is allowing speech that angers us, no matter how absurd or harsh it may sound.
I'm not trying to justify hate speech. If you're advocating for discrimination or violence, then you shouldn't get away with it. But saying "I don't approve of homosexuality" is not the same as saying "burn all gays!".
And we don't need laws to prohibit hate speech. These people always get called out on their bullshit, and in expressing your opinion in public (whether that be in real life or online), you get held up to public scrutiny (well, you should anyway). I don't see how we need laws to prohibit hate speech, when people seem willing to call those people out anyway.
I think in Canada's case it was mostly a legal thing, as there is very little someone can do for claiming libel or slander without those types of laws since slippery lawyers can find all sorts of loopholes. It's just like specific protections are added to protect minorities, even though technically they should be protected anyway, but lawyers have won cases against discrimination of minorities using the fact that there are no specific protections in place preventing discrimination against them.
I'm not trying to justify hate speech. If you're advocating for discrimination or violence, then you shouldn't get away with it. But saying … more"I don't approve of homosexuality" is not the same as saying "burn all gays!".
And we don't need laws to prohibit hate speech. These people always get called out on their bullshit, and in expressing your opinion in public (whether that be in real life or online), you get held up to public scrutiny (well, you should anyway). I don't see how we need laws to prohibit hate speech, when people seem willing to call those people out anyway.
Comments
I appreciate you show us this. I know moderating can't be an easy job, and I hope that this ind of stuff can stop, because you guys shouldn't have to go through all this without it making a difference.
We're pretty much just going in circles here, but I'll give a response anyway.
I'm sure this is the case in some instances, but it has not always been the case. I have already provided an example of that, with that being the transgender thread I had linked earlier. One single person posting some debatably poor taste in humor was enough to put an end to that one with one single post. The thread was relatively new, and I had been actively participating in it at the time, so I know there were no other posts removed.
Also, just because there may be a number of flagged comments made by various users, that doesn't mean those comments were worthy of being flagged.
Like I said in regards to this in my last post, I'm not advocating for insults in any form. An insult is an insult. Either someone is being malicious or they're not. That said, we again need to be objective in what is actually an insult and what is not. That's where the difference is. That's why I'm having this conversation at all, if that wasn't already clear. I understand that there may be a number of perceived insults, and as I have said from the very beginning, this is due to some people being oversensitive to differing opinions on subjects that they are passionate about. Not to personally criticize or anything, but I think the mods have been guilty of this as well, which is why we have people like Kenny/Lee getting banned, no matter the fact that they were civil and 100% well intending in their explanation of their moral viewpoint. I feel like this has extended to threads as well.
I'm not exactly a stranger to being around these types of threads, and I have never really seen this to be true, with maybe rare exception. Again, people are too easily insulted over these topics, and they need to find a way to not take other's viewpoints so personally, especially when they are not meant to me taken in that way. For example, saying that transgendered individuals are confused and need help instead of enablement is not an insult though I'm sure some people would love to take it that way. Just a random example, but I think you know what I'm getting at it. It's not the same thing as a personal attack. As far as personal attacks go (and ones that are even worth mentioning), I believe those are not really all that prevalent, certainly not so that it takes over a thread or dominates the discussion. If someone does go over the line and legitimately personally attacks someone for their point of view, then that can be addressed individually.
How can anyone ever know why a thread is closed unless that is explained? I don't see why that is seen as some big issue of privacy. A simple explanation of why a thread is getting closed isn't asking much. If you want to keep the names of posters out of it, I think that can rather easily be worked around.
You guys are doing amazing work in these threads. I've been thoroughly disgusted by some of the posts that stay up. I can't imagine the ones that get nuked. If I were a mod, I would probably have just banned social justice threads by now.
As I said, posts are removed from threads, so people who are moderators don't see them, so there's always a case of people thinking that only one bad thing was said and the thread was locked, but this is not the case (plus, there are plenty of instances of language that insults cultures (using similar language to that which Blind Sniper and I have pointed out to be problematic) in all of the threads that you mentioned, even among the posts that are still there.
Regardless of whether some people think that other people are being offended too easily by posts that insult people or insult people's cultures, the point is that they are being offended by these posts, and we can't have that. What is said on the forums reflects Telltale as a company, and they can't have comments on the forums that insult people, as they are supposed to be a welcoming place for gamers of all backgrounds. The Telltale forums aren't about freedom of speech, they are about discussing Telltale's games.
Telltale allows discussion of other topics, but only if they fall within the rules they set forth for their website. The Telltale terms of use forbids any post that "includes content that is patently offensive to the online community". Posts that have insults towards other cultures absolutely are "patently offensive to the online community", since we receive a lot of complaints about them, so they can't be allowed. We get tons of notifications through flags for posts like these, so we have to take care of them.
As I said, there's absolutely ways to debate without using offensive language (and it works, as carefully worded posts about controversial opinions without insults towards other cultures never get flagged, so they're not seen as offensive). However, very few people actually word their posts without any type of insult towards other people (either when posting a controversial opinion, or replying to one) on these forums. That's the hope that increased moderation rules will cause people to think more carefully before they post, as we can't allow people to make posts that many people find offensive. The terms of use are clear that we can't allow that to happen.
Moderators can't actually cite specific examples of problematic posts when closing threads, even without mentioning names, as even if the posts have been flagged and removed, the posts were up at one point, and people might have seen them, leading to the possibility of people getting harassed through PMs due to people thinking they were the cause of the thread closure if we actually post the content of the post that was removed (we've had plenty of people contacting us for help from private message harassment, so this is well within of the realm of possibility). The only thing that could be stated is that offending posts were removed and the thread is being closed for lack of respect (and I've stated that exact wording before in closing threads). We can't do any more than that.
Let me ask you, as a moderator, was my post offensive in any way, shape, or form?
How would you rate it?
Anything of value that stood out to you in particular, both good and bad!
Because it would be hypocritical of me to say other wise right?
I did respond to this to this in my last post, sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I had once again said that people (mods included) are not always objective in deciding what a legitimate insult is and what is not. This is especially true in regards to sensitive topics. I have already given examples of this. As I had said earlier, I understand that you all have to make judgement calls on these things, but I simply would like for moderators to take a closer look at what is actually an insult and what is not, while also reconsidering the reflex of closing threads when things start to get a little edgy.
We keep going back and forth here, but that is really all that I have been saying from the start. I don't think there is a very negative atmosphere on this forum. At the very least, I have noticed absolutely no difference in the atmosphere between the time that I joined, all the way through to now. It gets blown out of proportion.
Well in that case, your post offends me and I think you should delete it. I don't like that you have a difference of opinion.
See how ridiculous that line of thought is? This is why we need to have objectivity in looking at what is actually an insult and what is not (again, this is my main argument). How sad and delusional is our society that we have to censor ourselves like this? It's genuinely pathetic.
enter link description here
I understand that. We have been discussing those rules for pretty much the entirety of this conversation.
I have never disagreed with this. Again, it's about being reasonable in what is actually "offensive language" and what is not.
I simply do not believe that.
Alright, well, that rule doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me considering I think informing other posters with specific examples of where the line needs to be drawn outweighs the minor likelihood of a banned user receiving harassment (which can obviously be dealt with in turn). Anyway though, it would still be good to at least have a reason stated. That hasn't always been done.
Not from the posts that stay up, but we've flagged some pretty offensive posts. When we lock threads, it's usually because the amount of effort we put in flagging posts and banning users (or any other form of individual punishment) outweighs the amount of civil and constructive discussion going on.
I covered that earlier;
Haha, it would. As you said yourself, no one should be censored.
I've already responded to all of this, and I honestly don't want to have to keep repeating myself, so I'll just let my previous post answer this one. Not sure if you read all of it, but it answers the things that you have said here.
All in all I think you understand my point of view on this. Like was said when we first ended this conversation, I hope you can keep that point of view in mind when making judgement calls in the future. That's all I'm asking for, coupled with wanting people to be less sensitive in general.
The real problem is that people post insults without thinking. They use words that they wouldn't use if they were surrounded by people from the culture that they were against in real life, and that's the problem. People talk about how there is more a politically correct atmosphere today, and that's only because the internet has opened the entire world up to what you say. You no longer have a small group of people that you are talking to, now everyone from every walk of life can read them, and if you say something that is insulting towards them or their culture, they understandably get offended. People need to be more careful what they post. A good rule of thumb is that if you were in a group of people in real life that were from the culture that you were against and you think that what you would say would cause you physical harm, don't say it online.
I already addressed this.
Do you know who else also did that? Pretty much every nation in history. The only difference was the severity of this censorship. What is having a thread on a forum closed compared to having yourself and your entire family vanished in the night?
I understand, you want us to have more objective/consistent standards in how we handle threads that discuss social issues prior to locking them while still allowing people to exchange dissenting opinions and views. I just wanted to point out a few things, but ignoring that, I think we're mostly on the same page as you said. Other mods and I are taking this feedback into consideration and trying to figure out how to better keep things in order.
Sounds good, and thanks for doing that. I know I sort of said it before, but I'm definitely not trying to sound like I'm ripping on the overall job that you all do. I would say that you guys do a good job. Just thought I'd express some thoughts on this particular issue.
Don't worry, I understand - it's nothing personal and I totally get that you guys want to use this community section for something more than video games. I think most of it was us getting stuck on some semantics, but as I said, we've taking this feedback into consideration and are working towards trying to articulate some set standards in how people discuss various issues.
Nothing, my point was that the motive, regardless of the method, was the same; no challenge to someone's agenda. Just pointing out a fact. I personally, don't want any of ours goals as a society to mirror that of the Nazi regime, but part of free speech is allowing speech that angers us, no matter how absurd or harsh it may sound.
Canada has a good recent record on human rights, and their free speech laws prohibit hate speech. Hate isn't a fundamental human right.
I'm not trying to justify hate speech. If you're advocating for discrimination or violence, then you shouldn't get away with it. But saying "I don't approve of homosexuality" is not the same as saying "burn all gays!".
And we don't need laws to prohibit hate speech. These people always get called out on their bullshit, and in expressing your opinion in public (whether that be in real life or online), you get held up to public scrutiny (well, you should anyway). I don't see how we need laws to prohibit hate speech, when people seem willing to call those people out anyway.
I think in Canada's case it was mostly a legal thing, as there is very little someone can do for claiming libel or slander without those types of laws since slippery lawyers can find all sorts of loopholes. It's just like specific protections are added to protect minorities, even though technically they should be protected anyway, but lawyers have won cases against discrimination of minorities using the fact that there are no specific protections in place preventing discrimination against them.