Change in moderator policies

[Eye]

I have communicated poorly. I took your post to be justifying the actions of the people that spawned this split off discussion as well as the "Let's Insult HHR" thread. As that intersecting sub-group does not include you, it would be inappropriate for me to place any expectations on you personally. However, if you are in fact perfectly fine with the actions of said sub-group, then I would have to say that would make you a hypocrite as well. Either way, it seems like a rather one-sided policing effort to me.

I really think all would benefit if personal attacks, contempt and insults would not be allowed, so HHR included. With the announced, new mod policy a 'let's insult' thread would have been deleted immediately, I hope.
I have no personal issues with HHR, as far as I'm concerned he's welcome to debate about anything as long he is respectful towards others, stays within the law and does not use this site as a blog - as will others, as will I.
Addendum:
And as I have done, I think. I really think people should play the ball and not the man.

 

[sakichop]

I didn't read the whole thread and maybe I'm just being dense but what is the policy change?

The cartoon?

 

[Ripper]

Maybe the team has been discussing it in the throne room, but I haven't heard much from Corwin. He is presumably the poor bugger doing extra work if greater moderation is introduced?

 

[Eye]

I didn't read the whole thread and maybe I'm just being dense but what is the policy change?

The cartoon?

Myrthos in #12

 

[Ripper]

That's not too clear on what the new position is, though. I'm assuming he's opened this discussion up to get input, before making a decision?

 

[HiddenX]

That's not too clear on what the new position is, though. I'm assuming he's opened this discussion up to get input, before making a decision?

1. respect others
2. avoid discrimination, slander, defamation and insults
3. post in the correct sub-forum
4. don't reply to trolls
5. using alts is bad posting style
6. keep in my mind that the main purpose of RPGWatch are news and discussions about CRPGs

 

[Myrthos]

People can have whatever view they have on whatever demographic group or person. That does not mean it gives them a right to discriminate or insult that group or person here on RPGWatch because that is their opinion. There is simply no right anyone has to discriminate or insult anyone else.
Yes, insults are relative. What one person finds insulting the other does not. Also, in general, most people not belonging to a certain group have a much higher threshold for insults towards that group than people in it.
Whenever the topics are about homosexuality, women, religion or politics things tend to get quite personal rather soon. Why should that be allowed to happen? Because of the debate? Should it be possible to have an open debate about anything, where it is allowed to say whatever people want to say? Even if this is discriminating or insulting?

Alternatively, suppose you are in a bar with your wife and some random guy starts telling all women, including your wife, the negative stuff about women that you can read amongst others in the P&R forum. Would you say to your wife that she should not make a problem of that, the guy is entitled to his opinion and that she should grow a thicker skin. You also would stand up for his right to say that stuff, when the owner of the bar wants to throw him out?
Would you not expect a certain level of respect?

I had a change of mind to the moderating policies of this site, based on the feedback I have received and the people that have left the site because of the 'debates' and what is said to them.
Let's also not overreact. This is not going to be a 180 degrees change. This is about setting some ground rules. This is also not only about the P&R forum, although that forum certainly does not bring out the best in everyone.

The proposed rules have not yet been discussed with the team. Once that is done, they will become reality.

 

[sakichop]

Alternatively, suppose you are in a bar with your wife and some random guy starts telling all women, including your wife, the negative stuff about women that you can read amongst others in the P&R forum. Would you say to your wife that she should not make a problem of that, the guy is entitled to his opinion and that she should grow a thicker skin.

It depends, how big did you say this guy was?:lol: Sorry couldn't resist.

Sounds like pretty common sense stuff unfortunately common sense is one of the first things to go when tempers flare.

We all lose are tempers from time to time and say stupid stuff, I think it's how often you allow yourself to lose your temper that should play a big factor in discipline. my 2 cents.

 

[Ripper]

@Myrthos

Agreed. The key point you make, I think, is the same as what zahratustra is driving at - that gross insults don't just take the form of telling one member they're a nasty idiot, but can be at their worst in the form vile, disrespectful bigotry, calmly delivered with politesse.

What I've seen many times is essentially: "All I've said is that black people are inferior, that Muslims are an infestation of rapists and killers, that gays are degenerate sinners, and women should mind their place… and now here comes that awful Ripper again to be rude to me. Oh, this won't do at all!"

 

[Dez]

Well I visit here for the videogame and normal offtopic discussion, but I think it is great that this place has this kind of virtual debate arena for more serious topics. I don't really have a stamina for those kind of marathon discussions, but let these guys who enjoy the debate have their debate pit.

Imo the current moderation policy works outside p&r atleast. Sure there have been occasional heated arguments, but better that than a forum where people are "afraid" of speaking up because a strict moderation policy. I'd hate to see this place turn into some kind of virtual nanny state. Basic common sense should be enough. Like Hiddenx often puts it: "Treat eachother with respect." Do we really need any other rules than that?

As for P&R, I think anyone who enters that subforum should understand that there is a great risk of hearing something unpleasent. Even though most of us like rpgs, we're not alike. If one gets upset because someone challenges his world views there, I think it would be best not taking part in such discussions. That being said things like personal attacks, discrimination, insults, plain illegal content etc should not be tolerated.

I'm just hoping that this change in moderation doesn't lead to a situation where more unpopular viewpoints are not tolerated at all. If that happens we will only have the like minded people discussing which only leads to a massive circle jerk (pardon my language).

Edit: but yeah maybe some kind of update to rules is needed because we're even having this kind of discussion here. Its just intresting how Watch managed to go on almost a decade before any remarkable change was needed to a moderation policy.

 

[lackblogger]

Lackblogger, you really need to bring it down. You deliver a great deal of silly and semi-coherent verbiage with a cocky unpleasantness, and it's quite embarrassing.

IMO, these sorts of contributions are having a poor effect on the site, and are not very Christmassy.

And when I quoted the above post and provided a light-hearted response I got the following reply:

What is the purpose in quoting all that again? I said Merry Christmas early because I'm going away for a while, and then I had a minute to kill and looked in. What do think you've achieved by pointing that out?

I'm just telling you straight how I see things, because I think you're becoming a problem to more than just my nerves.

And yet here we are in a thread about common decency with Ripper going full holier than thou about what is or isn't decent forum behaviour. Not only were the above posts quoted in their entirety, thereby proving that they were both entirely off-topic, but that they were off-topic personal attacks, and this in thread that wasn't in P&R and thread that was about a movie…

I've had a look at the thread that prompted this thread, and while I couldn't bare to take too much interest in that thread as it doesn't know if it's a laughs thread or a factual thread by the nature of the OP, making me unsure how to reply or whether it's worth replying, I don't see anyone quite as unpleasant as Ripper basically telling some random 'normal' user that they are not welcome on the site without any reasoning and without any explanation.

 

[Eye]

And when I quoted the above post and provided a light-hearted response I got the following reply:



And yet here we are in a thread about common decency with Ripper going full holier than thou about what is or isn't decent forum behaviour. Not only were the above posts quoted in their entirety, thereby proving that they were both entirely off-topic, but that they were off-topic personal attacks, and this in thread that wasn't in P&R and thread that was about a movie…

I've had a look at the thread that prompted this thread, and while I couldn't bare to take too much interest in that thread as it doesn't know if it's a laughs thread or a factual thread by the nature of the OP, making me unsure how to reply or whether it's worth replying, I don't see anyone quite as unpleasant as Ripper basically telling some random 'normal' user that they are not welcome on the site without any reasoning and without any explanation.

I haven't got a clue what you're talking about, and I am not interested. Could you please take your personal business with Ripper elsewhere, PM for instance, and respond to the topic at hand: change in mod policy? I don't see why that should be brought down to one theme: Ripper.

 

[DArtagnan]

So, when Ripper makes it a personal issue somewhere - that's ok, but when lackblogger tries to defend himself he should take it to PM?

This in a thread that's about how the Watch deals with personal attacks and why they should change moderation policies?

If you care about treating people with "respect" - then I'd be a lot more concerned about this kind of thing, than emotionally fueled "bad words" spoken by people who're clearly out to provoke.

It's one thing to want moderation, but it's quite another to allow people who're genuinely deluded enough to believe themselves capable of establishing objective justice the privilege of control.

 

[Moriendor]

^ it lives

Welcome back, dude!

 

[DArtagnan]

Thank you

I meant to stay away - but this thread caught my eye, sadly.

I like the Watch overall, and I'd be unhappy if these delusional creatures assumed control without having a say.

 

[Eye]

So, when Ripper makes it a personal issue somewhere - that's ok, but when lackblogger tries to defend himself he should take it to PM?

This in a thread that's about how the Watch deals with personal attacks and why we should change moderation policies?

If you care about treating people with "respect" - then I'd be a lot more concerned about this kind of thing, than emotionally fueled "bad words" spoken by people who're clearly out to provoke.

It's one thing to want moderation, but it's quite another to allow people who're genuinely deluded enough to believe themselves capable of establishing objective justice the privilege of control.

As far as I was concerned the remarks made by Ripper in his last post were general and not quotes.
If it were quotes it was wrong to do so. Personal attacks should be part of the past, as far as I'm concerned.

Again: all could benefit from a change in mod policy. Including lackblogger, including HHR, including you.

I dislike getting the important topic being hacked for personal issues, no matter by who.

 

[Eye]

Thank you

I meant to stay away - but this thread caught my eye, sadly.

I like the Watch overall, and I'd be unhappy if these delusional creatures assumed control without having a say.

You're referring to who? Are you making this personal?

 

[DArtagnan]

You're referring to who? Are you making this personal?

You and people like you. Including Ripper, who's demonstrated time and again that his desire for "moderation" never seems to relate to his own insults.

Define personal.

I'm talking about the line of thinking you clearly represent - as in a delusional one of understanding the true benefit or intention of a hurtful statement. If you want to make how you think into your person - so be it.

 

[GothicGothicness]

1. They have to show they are willing to debate.
2. They have to remain within the (European) law.
3. Why should intolerant people be allowed to post slander, defamation and insults, just for the sake of allowing debate, causing people with a more moderate view, who thought they were on an innocent gaming site, to leave?
Why should they be allowed to post their slander, defamation and insults here? Because these people happen to like RPGs?
Frankly I think if someone would like to talk about his/her extreme opinions and insist on formulating them in an offensive way, s/he should visit other, more appropriate channels.

1. That is fine by me, if a person just keeps posting without bringing any new information or ideas it is pointless.
2. That is also fine by me, although I don't think that there is a uniform "European" law of what is allowed and what isn't. There is a huge difference between the different countries in the EU in terms of discrimination and freedom of speech as well, so it might be hard to define this. But I think we have very few cases of that here.
3. Well, I believe the key here is not formulating them in an offensive way or slander and so on, but if you look in the politics forum, I think that there are very few threads which such a titles or content. For example I don't think "Homosexual finds freedom through Christ" is either offensive or slander. It is actually interesting if religion could change a persons sexual desires, and something that could be worth discussing? If we are to have new rules, I guess it would be good to have examples of which threads/posts crossed the line of the rules.

 

[DArtagnan]

As far as I was concerned the remarks made by Ripper in his last post were general and not quotes.
If it were quotes it was wrong to do so. Personal attacks should be part of the past, as far as I'm concerned.

Again: all could benefit from a change in mod policy. Including lackblogger, including HHR, including you.

I dislike getting the important topic being hacked for personal issues, no matter by who.

A change would benefit me? It's possible, but very unlikely. It very much depends on the nature of the change.

AFAIK, this thread is about a change in moderation. As such, providing examples of how the very people who claim to want a change - are among those throwing insults at people would seem appropriate.

I think that's both relevant and food for thought.

Just my opinion, though.