+- Hydaelyn Role-Players (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18)
+-- Forum: Off-Topic (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=42)
+--- Forum: Off-Topic Discussion (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Thread: Feedback for moderation policy post (/showthread.php?tid=11381)
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - cherrybomb - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 11:24 PM)Graeham Ridgefield Wrote: In short? Calling people 'whiny' or 'stupid' does little to forge constructive debate or a pleasant atmosphere. I'm sure there's plenty of other sites you can go to if you want a space to spout memes or complain about 'triggering' in threads were it isn't even all that relevant to the discussion at the time of posting.
Speaking as an outsider and newcomer here, I have to agree. It's discourse like this that keeps my toeing the edge of the community instead of jumping in the deep end even though a lot of people here seem pretty cool, tbh.
Probably shooting myself in the shoot by posting this when I'm still brand new, but whatever. It's a little discouraging to see an otherwise decent community with such a strong undercurrent of tension. Like, what do triggers even have to do with anything? Was the out-of-nowhere fist-shaking at some perceived hivemind of oversensitive tumblrina babbys remotely necessary? Punishing personal attacks and other such behaviors that have a consistently negative effect on a community =/= a happiness is mandatory citizen-esque 1984 regime. It's not that difficult to understand - just have a little self-awareness, and some empathy for the other folks behind the keyboard, even if you disagree with 'em.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Nero - 04-30-2015
Ooooookay.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: I threw money at a forum hoping to be able to discuss anything freely
Your money does not dictate the rules or how they are enforced, so I've no idea why you mentioned this.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: ...from what I read this is turning into the next Gamergate.
Your hyperbole does you no credit when all it signifies is that you didn't take the time to actually read and comprehend the content of the discussions. You accuse all of the participants of this thread of blowing something out of proportion, only to be the sole person who is melting down due to a combination of misconceptions, generalizations, and outright falsehood.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: Under what circumstances would posting in your signature another means to contact the user be wrong or even questionable
If said signature involved blatant commercialization and/or some form of the incentive of payment to encourage clicking, as highlighted in the rules, since you asked.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: Triggers are just a means for sheltered folks to stay more sheltered and penned in their little safety box instead of accepting that there are things on the internet that they don't like. It's depressing and an unhealthy way with coping with what makes you uncomfortable.
While I agree that people who go on the Internet have a responsibility to be their own content filter, what you're arguing is like me saying that governments only exist for corruption and thus should never be respected or acknowledged.Â
What you personally believe about 'triggers' does absolutely nothing to discount the fact that they exist and are capable of affecting people, despite the Internet being responsible for discrediting the term. Ironically enough, your blatant disparagement of the term marks you as someone who would like to be penned and sheltered away from acknowledging the fact that triggers are capable of being real and negatively affecting the people who suffer them.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote:  In addition, if there is a link to something like say, a five second audio clip related to the user's character (I'm obviously talking about my sig link), is that illegal? Do I need to tag it?Â
No. Which, if you comprehended the rules as they are posted, you would know.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: Don't even try to disregard anything I say as argument bait either
Disregarding it would be a favour, since by even taking the time to respond to your absurdities I'm only escalating the situation.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: Serious shame for not going a week without some thread that will rustle some chump's tailfeathers.
The only rustled tailfeathers anyone can see is yours. Most of the responses, while occasionally being openly or passively aggressive in some manner, were more or less measured and restrained to the idea of civilized discourse. And then you entered full of ad hominem and a lack of perspective or comprehension and proceeded to flip the table and then have the gall to blame those participating in the discussion.
Hey, remember when you wrote this?
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: I'm actually pretty rustled by this
Yeah. That's what I'm talking about.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: Get tighter on threads that erupt into things like this, because it just turns into a big shitstorm that causes users to quarrel among one another.Â
I imagine they would start by giving you a warning, if you were paying attention.
(04-30-2015, 10:58 PM)☆Flynt Reddard☆ Wrote: But what do I know? I'm just a stupid teenager, right guys?Â
For future reference, your condescending self-deprecation only harms whatever argument you were trying to make if you do nothing but give your opponent the grounds to agree with it.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Aya - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 11:49 PM)cherrybomb Wrote: It's a little discouraging to see an otherwise decent community with such a strong undercurrent of tension.This is why I am so utterly and completely confused... I have no idea what's going on. This doesn't sound like the RPC to me, at all.(hence my Through Looking Glass comment...)
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Edvyn - 04-30-2015
it takes only a single spark to start a fire
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - McBeefâ„¢ - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 11:53 PM)Aya Wrote:(04-30-2015, 11:49 PM)cherrybomb Wrote: It's a little discouraging to see an otherwise decent community with such a strong undercurrent of tension.This is why I am so utterly and completely confused... I have no idea what's going on. This doesn't sound like the RPC to me, at all.(hence my Through Looking Glass comment...)
Just pretend it's a housing/dragoon thread Aya. Then it will all make sense.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Aduu Avagnar - 04-30-2015
Anyways, back on topic, Nat, did you have any other issues with the rules/moderating thereof?
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Flashhelix - 04-30-2015
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - McBeefâ„¢ - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 11:55 PM)Nakoli Chalahko Wrote: Anyways, back on topic, Nat, did you have any other issues with the rules/moderating thereof?
Yes.
RAWRAWRAWRAWRAWR.
RAWR.
RAWR.
RAWWAR RAWr.
Nah I'm good.
I just got a little annoyed at all the snippy comments people had just because I had the gall to ask for clarifications in the thread specifically made for clarifications.
I feel confident that things shall continue on as they always have~ and these rules aren't really a big deal.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Bopdoot - 04-30-2015
>_< I feel like quoting and nitpicking people never seems to help the discussion..but it may just be me.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Edvyn - 04-30-2015
(04-30-2015, 11:59 PM)Bopdoot Wrote: >_< I feel like quoting and nitpicking people never seems to help the discussion..but it may just be me.isn't that exactly how discussion works though?
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - McBeefâ„¢ - 05-01-2015
(04-30-2015, 11:59 PM)Edvyn Wrote:(04-30-2015, 11:59 PM)Bopdoot Wrote: >_< I feel like quoting and nitpicking people never seems to help the discussion..but it may just be me.isn't that exactly how discussion works though?
Not really though. I mean I have no idea wtf Flynt is talking about regardless, but nitpicking individual bits is a bad way to discuss things.
An argument is like a complete thing, you need to attack the entire beast. Pulling specific sentences out and tearing them apart ignores the context in which they were written. For example: ( I don't necessarily agree with this point)
"Marriage is an economic and legal matter more than a romantic one. I oppose gay marriage, and feel that going down the road to allow it is wrong and a waste of time. Marriage should be controlled by religious institutions, and not dictated by the government. However the legal, tax, and benefits of marriage should instead be transferred to civil unions, and be a completely secular manner."
Someone could pull out, " I oppose gay marriage, and feel that going down the road to allow it is wrong and a waste of time. Marriage should be controlled by religious institutions, and not dictated by the government"
And tear that apart, a statement which by itself, does not really represent the argument that paragraph is making.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - Edvyn - 05-01-2015
(05-01-2015, 12:05 AM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote:what if you pull out each sentence individually and kill them one by one to make your response easier to read/process? like internet debate space invaders? that's basically tackling the entire argument(04-30-2015, 11:59 PM)Edvyn Wrote:(04-30-2015, 11:59 PM)Bopdoot Wrote: >_< I feel like quoting and nitpicking people never seems to help the discussion..but it may just be me.isn't that exactly how discussion works though?
Not really though. I mean I have no idea wtf Flynt is talking about regardless, but nitpicking individual bits is a bad way to discuss things.
An argument is like a complete thing, you need to attack the entire beast. Pulling specific sentences out and tearing them apart ignores the context in which they were written. For example: ( I don't necessarily agree with this point)
"Marriage is an economic and legal matter more than a romantic one. I oppose gay marriage, and feel that going down the road to allow it is wrong and a waste of time. Marriage should be controlled by religious institutions, and not dictated by the government. However the legal, tax, and benefits of marriage should instead be transferred to civil unions, and be a completely secular manner."
Someone could pull out, " I oppose gay marriage, and feel that going down the road to allow it is wrong and a waste of time. Marriage should be controlled by religious institutions, and not dictated by the government"
And tear that apart, a statement which by itself, does not really represent the argument that paragraph is making.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - FreelanceWizard - 05-01-2015
So, teachable moment #3.
That video up there? And that meme image post? Those are both warnable posts. "Spurious off-topic posts, including meme images and patent nonsense." It's right there in section 1. Derailing threads with that stuff is a very, very quick way to run up your warning level. Does that mean you can never post such things? No. If you include some content and context as well and the image or video is germane to your post, then it's fine. If the thread is about meme images or videos, have fun. The policies are about context and purpose.
Consider this your "tap on the shoulder" notice. Next time's a formal warning.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - McBeefâ„¢ - 05-01-2015
(05-01-2015, 12:07 AM)Edvyn Wrote: what if you pull out each sentence individually and kill them one by one to make your response easier to read/process? like internet debate space invaders? that's basically tackling the entire argument
I mean it makes it easier to look like you're right, however it is still treating every sentence as a separate argument.
It depends if your goal is to wreck someone's argument and look right, or to come to the truth of a matter.
I think If you actually want to try and come to a common truth, then nitpicking every sentence is bad, since you tend to look at each sentence as a puzzle to be defeated and discredited (which is easy on their own) instead of considering the validity of their argument as a whole.
RE: Feedback for moderation policy post - McBeefâ„¢ - 05-01-2015
(05-01-2015, 12:09 AM)FreelanceWizard Wrote: So, teachable moment #3.
That video up there? And that meme image post? Those are both warnable posts. "Spurious off-topic posts, including meme images and patent nonsense." It's right there in section 1. Derailing threads with that stuff is a very, very quick way to run up your warning level. Does that mean you can never post such things? No. If you include some content and context as well and the image or video is germane to your post, then it's fine. If the thread is about meme images or videos, have fun. The policies are about context and purpose.
Consider this your "tap on the shoulder" notice. Next time's a formal warning.
This is actually pretty reasonable. For example Something awful has had for a long time a no exceptions meme = ban policy. Unless of course its in a thread or sub-forum that allows it.
A ban that will cost you 10 dollars.
They don't really add anything to most conversations. And hey, now that they're banned, they're far more exciting.
Like heroin.