| Could you be more specific, Rufus-kun? Many posters can be degrading. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| I believe it would be incredibly difficult to judge a user on an insult, because the use of insults in some context is too broad of a situation to approach. There is too many reasons for why a insult was used. There are also too many post which context might suggest that the insult wasn't hostile. What I think moderators should do more, is focus on user who make provocative post. Users who make provocative post and use insult as a form of hostility in there post should be warned and/or banned. Doing something like this is pretty much asking for a person to get either... a.) Sensitive and offended b.) Aggressive right back and lead to a derailed thread |
| Schools out, No job at moment, STILL hello MAL Eh..I will try to be online |
Immahnoob said: Could you be more specific, Rufus-kun? Many posters can be degrading. I'm not fucking around, what the hell are you talking about? If the vast majority or a forum/board/thread deem a particular person's post to be "lowering the quality of the thread considerably" to say it in rather loose terms, then surely for the benefit of the majority they should be silenced? |
MellowJello said: Adramelech said: I'll point out three examples that I've had.It is not rocket science to detect if an insult is directed at a friend as a joke or to harass and attack the other person. I don't know if you are not able to differentiate but people generally tend to have that ability. 1. I told Tavor that I'd kill him if you didn't watch x show. Another user failed to recognize that, insulted me (I didn't respond, just reported), and subsequently both of us received a warning, despite my explanation to the mod handling it. Of course Tavor understood it was a joke. 2. Red Keys tells me to shut up for saying "why not", I poke fun at him by saying I can do it because "why not?" Other users jump in thinking we're having an actual argument. 3. Irc. I join in after ban, I start yuckin' it up with people who know me on there, suddenly irc gets muted and we're told not to insult each other. We clearly explained that we were all friends, and the mod's answer was "I do not keep track of who is friends with who". And no more insults were allowed because "people might read the atmosphere wrong". Well okay then. No more friend moments. So no, "tend to" does not mean guaranteed to. People are fucking stupid WHOOPS moist cucumbers, and not even mods were able to determine on their own if insults can be read as a joke or not. Literally all 3 of those points are cases of you shitposting and derailing discussions to jerk yourself off - which is against the rules. They might say you're in trouble for insulting people, but the fact is you're ruining any semblance of real communication going on in order to hijack threads and ircs so you can make retarded in-jokes with your friends. This is a bigger detriment to the site than almost anything else - not just you, but anyone who just hops into a thread and starts that kind of shit. Don't defend yourself with examples that show you breaking OTHER rules than just insulting and being surprised you got in trouble for them. If you want to 'yuck it up' with your pals, do it in your own chats, your skype circlejerk, or a club. That is not what the main forum sections are for, nor what the IRC is for. MAL is not about you, jellybelly, and you really need to figure that out some day and stop walking into some actual discussion and throwing jokes around to derail the entire conversation into being about you or chatting with you. I don't care why they warn or ban you at that point - just that they DO because you're shitposting and disrupting conversation, which in itself is AGAINST THE RULES and you do it constantly. Every now and then is one thing, but it's just constant from you and every time it really DOES completely derail the conversation - it's not like you do it and get one or two replies, half the time it fills pages of the thread, and the history comes into play as well. ----- Tyrel said: Deleted my former post, sounded more like a rant. Question... How about banning people from posting to the forums instead of IP banning them from the site? OT: The only time I think people should be banned is if their constantly doing it on a daily basis. Lots of people will get into a heated argument and throw some big old cuss words randomly. This is something I discussed with the staff over a year ago and again more recently - I was told pretty clearly they would like to be able to do that, but the site is simply not designed to be able to do that, and Xinil has no interest in bothering. ------ As for everyone else's points - the mods usually look into the thread and through it, see how things happened, see the context of what you said, if you're an active user they also consider your typical behavior, and they also check with your history. There is already a system for exactly what you're asking there to be - it's just that it's not perfect. There's 3 new mods who are still getting to know everyone (because they were made mods when knowing nothing about the site for some reason, but that's another matter all together) and get the feel of the site and how the community works and what is generally acceptable or not. The old staff fucks up sometimes too, but not nearly as much, and most of the people who complain about being banned when they don't 'deserve it' simply don't want CONSEQUENCES for that so they can keep being how they want instead of changing. This is a privately run website, not 'your' website, YOU need to change how you are if you want to take part in it, enough that you aren't clashing with the rules 90% of the time or making the experience terrible for other users either. For example, you yourself, mellow, are someone who consistently breaks rules of all kinds - yet you only complain about this the rare times you actually get banned for it. No shit there are times you get banned because you just build up a massive list of shitposting, insulting, derailing on purpose, agitating people, and circlejerking that ends up ruining threads. EVENTUALLY any mod will give you a ban for that yet you CHOOSE TO KEEP DOING IT. A ban is meant as a way to show you 'this is not acceptable behavior for this site, please control yourself in the future', which is why you haven't been PERMANENTLY banned, yet you refuse to ever take that into consideration or acknowledge that you post like a 13 year old who is unloved by his parents and needs the attention from being the class clown and a little rebel. If you stopped that, you wouldn't be in trouble - but you do not want to stop that because you think you should be free to ruin the site for many others simply to satisfy yourself. Worse, the mods have sadly helped make you feel that's okay by not permanently banning you after you continued to ignore the warnings and short bans, which essentially is showing you you'll continue getting away with it - so you don't even bother pretending to change. Actions have consequences, you disagree with them because you refuse to grow the fuck up and accept responsibility for the things you do. And anyone claiming this is 'blocking your freedom' - that's irrelevant. This isn't a site run by the government, they can do anything they want with your freedom. Anyway, if you'll notice - even if you were the type to get banned a lot before as well - things have only really ramped up just recently when the new staff was added, and I really don't think that's a coincidence. They can't mod based on knowing you, your history, your personality, and the full context of the thread and your relationships with people in that thread if they are new to the community. The new mods ARE new to the community, as all three only posted in episode discussions and barely contributed to the site in any other way. So, basically, all this stuff about report personal attacks/insults directly aimed at you if you are genuinely insulted and get action taken for that - well, that's already how it is, it's just kind of broken at the moment while the new staff learns everyone and their personalities, learns the "culture" of MAL, and so on. |
TallonKarrde23Oct 28, 2013 1:27 PM
 |
| Tallon, in the IRC you can talk about anything, don't say shit unless it's founded shit. The problem there is that we're a little community and we like insulting each other there. They don't even follow the chat all the time, and most of the times they let us do it anyway. Also, don't forget that most of Mellow's posts do have the answer to OP's question or OP's discussion. Yes, he could stop being such an annoyance most of the times because he's not actually funny in the slightest, then again, most of the time's what he does isn't called shitposting, that's simply your opinion, Tallon. Plus, sometimes his shit attracts debates. And that's what I kind of hate about how the system on MAL works, random people that you never hear about become Forum Moderators because they simply signed in for it and they have no actual experience with the boards. I don't understand why they don't simply try out people that want to be moderators and are really active on MAL. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: Tallon, in the IRC you can talk about anything, don't say shit unless it's founded shit. The problem there is that we're a little community and we like insulting each other there. They don't even follow the chat all the time, and most of the times they let us do it anyway. Also, don't forget that most of Mellow's posts do have the answer to OP's question or OP's discussion. Yes, he could stop being such an annoyance most of the times because he's not actually funny in the slightest, then again, most of the time's what he does isn't called shitposting, that's simply your opinion, Tallon. Plus, sometimes his shit attracts debates. And that's what I kind of hate about how the system on MAL works, random people that you never hear about become Forum Moderators because they simply signed in for it and they have no actual experience with the boards. I don't understand why they don't simply try out people that want to be moderators and are really active on MAL. I tried discussing that last point with the staff but it just got the other thread locked immediately and never went anywhere - I entirely agree though. And you might be right about IRC - if you're there you know I'm not someone who has been, so I shouldn't have stated anything about it. However, depending on the context of things - it may be a 'free for all' but if you end up turning it into how the Chat threads were (oppressive, rude, insulting, pushes others out of using it, etc), that's pretty bad. I'm not saying that's how it is, just a "if it is then that's still bad". I mean the IRC, like the forums, is for everyone - not for one clique to take over. I'm not going to pretend knowing about the IRC, and I didn't mean to to begin with, I just said it without thinking earlier. As for Mellow - I wouldn't say his most recent display of shitposting is really opinion or 'answering the OP' when 90% of it is just saying WHY NOT like a 5 year old who just learned to do that (they all do at that age) and distracting multiple other users to quote him or just respond to him with more in-jokes. But this is getting too specifically about Mellow, and that's my bad, but lets please avoid turning it into being about his specific issues as that's dangerously close to distracting from the point of the thread any further. |
TallonKarrde23Oct 28, 2013 1:34 PM
|
Adramelech said: No, you are diverting the point. You say connotations are "common sense". If that were true, then there would be no argument -- yet there are. Here I am. My existence proves you wrong.elite-sama said: You are diverting the point. Calling someone dumb and calling someone naive is clearly different and it is common sense to use them in different way. I don't recall suggesting "managing the whole forums according to common sense", but that is already what the forum rules are mostly created upon.Adramelech said: oh common sense is relativeNo, there is common sense; which you deliberately ignore to make a point but it looks ridiculous. And common sense is mostly global about such issues. Why I said that? Because next thing you are going to say is "oh common sense is relative". So... this thread is about coming up with a consistent forum policy regarding insults. Your solution: we leave it up to common sense. In other words, that the mods exercise their undefinable, non-systematic common sense. I hardly see that as a real solution that's any different than what goes on now. If all connotations are common sense, then it would be literally impossible for anyone to be mistaken of the intent of others. Clearly, this is not true. According to Merriam-Webster: Dumb - not having the capability to process data; showing a lack of intelligence Naive - deficient in worldly wisdom or informed judgment To say that they are not synonymous despite that I have provided no specific context whatsoever would be to imply that 'intelligence' can never be associated with 'wisdom' or 'informed judgment'. We know this to be false, that 'intelligence' is often confused with 'wisdom', and that there is no objective measurement between the two. I solve problems in a systematic way. The problem is "How do we handle insults on MAL?" In order to answer the problem, we must first define "insults". The suggestion that an insult does not need to be defined because it is "common sense" is a fallacy. If this were true, then this topic would have never been brought up, because it would be impossible for a person to disagree with a mod's decisions. The fact that you are posting in this thread refutes your own point. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
-Muuse- said: Pat_To_Do-List said: So in the end, the people who live their everyday life with insulting others or insulted will use an insult as a "friendly" thing. So, I think the moderator should ban this kind of people. Wait, wait, wait, wait.... So, if I read this right, you're saying people who insult others, or are used to being insulted , will exclusively use insults as a "friendly" thing. What? Yes, you are right. Though I was wrong with "insulting others or insulted." It supposed to be "insulting others & insulted." |
| I like anime. |
| I disagree. I've "insulted" quite a few, but I don't use it as a "friendly" thing. |
 |
starrysky said: I disagree. I've "insulted" quite a few, but I don't use it as a "friendly" thing. Unfortunately, not everyone just like you. |
| I like anime. |
| I think you mean fortunately. Anyways, if everyone involved knows it's just friendly shitposting than it doesn't matter. |
|
starrysky said: I think you mean fortunately. Anyways, if everyone involved knows it's just friendly shitposting than it doesn't matter. It still does matter. Because those kind of people tend to insult others. Trust me. |
| I like anime. |
starrysky said: I think you mean fortunately. Anyways, if everyone involved knows it's just friendly shitposting than it doesn't matter. Friendly or not, shitposting is shitposting. That in and of itself is against the rules, the fact it's filled with insults just makes it doubly so. Plus, anyone who claims they insult people "in a friendly way" are, as already mentioned, very likely to genuinely insult others as well - such as a certain person right in this thread who recently got in trouble for harassing a user in a thread constantly. Allowing "friendly" insults not only promotes shitposting, it makes people feel more safe in using offensive language and attacking users because they think they can just act like "well that's how I am to everyone!" even when their intentions are clearly to hurt someone in other cases. |
|
| If the rules said to jump off a bridge would you do it? I think you would. |
|
TallonKarrde23 said: Is it? I was under the impression that mods can ban/warn you if they happen to come across an insult, reported or not.So, basically, all this stuff about report personal attacks/insults directly aimed at you if you are genuinely insulted and get action taken for that - well, that's already how it is, it's just kind of broken at the moment while the new staff learns everyone and their personalities, learns the "culture" of MAL, and so on. TallonKarrde23 said: What if it's included in a post that's otherwise on topic and relevant?starrysky said: I think you mean fortunately. Anyways, if everyone involved knows it's just friendly shitposting than it doesn't matter. Friendly or not, shitposting is shitposting. That in and of itself is against the rules, the fact it's filled with insults just makes it doubly so. |
 |
starrysky said: If the rules said to jump off a bridge would you do it? I think you would. If the rules said to jump off a bridge, I wouldn't choose to use the site. If you have a problem with the rules you are very free to leave - so the idea of lemmings or sheeple isn't at work here whatsoever, nor is it a viable response. Plus, there's no reasoning for why that would be in the rules - however not insulting users DOES make sense. Red_Keys said: TallonKarrde23 said: Is it? I was under the impression that mods can ban/warn you if they happen to come across an insult, reported or not.So, basically, all this stuff about report personal attacks/insults directly aimed at you if you are genuinely insulted and get action taken for that - well, that's already how it is, it's just kind of broken at the moment while the new staff learns everyone and their personalities, learns the "culture" of MAL, and so on. TallonKarrde23 said: What if it's included in a post that's otherwise on topic and relevant?starrysky said: I think you mean fortunately. Anyways, if everyone involved knows it's just friendly shitposting than it doesn't matter. Friendly or not, shitposting is shitposting. That in and of itself is against the rules, the fact it's filled with insults just makes it doubly so. Like I mentioned before, then it's a different situation and context has to be taken into consideration at all times. And I'm not 100% sure if they may warn you for insulting if they happen to see it on their own, but I've noticed the mods don't really browse the site on their own so it's rare that would happen to begin with. |
|
| If you have a problem with people that are friends insulting each other because they're comfortable enough with their friendship to know they don't mean it you're free to stay out of those conversations and find others to participate in. My point in bringing up the bridge thing was that you think every single rule should be followed and enforced, and yet that's not possible even on a website like MAL. Unless you want the mods to become nazis. |
|
TallonKarrde23 said: So basically, your position is that everything that might lead to or encourage someone else to break the rules should be against the rules as well?Allowing "friendly" insults not only promotes shitposting, it makes people feel more safe in using offensive language and attacking users because they think they can just act like "well that's how I am to everyone!" even when their intentions are clearly to hurt someone in other cases. TallonKarrde23 said: This is especially ironic since you've posted a Suggestions thread trying to change the rules.If the rules said to jump off a bridge, I wouldn't choose to use the site. If you have a problem with the rules you are very free to leave - so the idea of lemmings or sheeple isn't at work here whatsoever, nor is it a viable response. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
elite-sama said: So basically, your position is that everything that might lead to or encourage someone else to break the rules should be against the rules as well? Exactly. |
| I like anime. |
elite-sama said: TallonKarrde23 said: This is especially ironic since you've posted a Suggestions thread trying to change the rules.If the rules said to jump off a bridge, I wouldn't choose to use the site. If you have a problem with the rules you are very free to leave - so the idea of lemmings or sheeple isn't at work here whatsoever, nor is it a viable response. I never did that though. The only suggestions I've made have been about making the administration and staff more transparent and open to communicating with users - I never asked for a single change in rules. I have asked for change, but not for a change in the rules. That part of your post was pulled out of your ass, so I responded - the other part was ignoring everything else I said (throwing away all the context) on purpose so you could try and argue a point you made up on your own. I don't respond to people who don't bother reading what's said to them or choose to act like FoxNews and take what they can out of context to essentially make things up as they go - as no matter what I say in reply, you will simply do the same thing yet again. |
TallonKarrde23Oct 28, 2013 8:49 PM
|
TallonKarrde23 said: Whew, aggressive! That kind of temper might work in your favorite Shounen, but no one else is fooled. I responded exactly to what you said.That part of your post was pulled out of your ass, so I responded - the other part was ignoring everything else I said (throwing away all the context) on purpose so you could try and argue a point you made up on your own. I don't respond to people who don't bother reading what's said to them or choose to act like FoxNews and take what they can out of context to essentially make things up as they go - as no matter what I say in reply, you will simply do the same thing yet again. Ironically, again, this little exchange indicates exactly how one can be insulting without swear words. By Pat_To_Do-List's and Adramalech's standards -- and possibly your standards -- we should've both been banned. Fox News? I will simply do what again? Negative value judgments, you hear that battlechili1? I have a good laugh at people whose criticisms apply to themselves but they don't realize it. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Basically, you guys should have been warned for some of your posts with the current rules, if your ideas do get implemented Pat and Tallon, this Forum will be a graveyard if they take your own rules literally. You're calling "shitposting" anything that isn't your standard again. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: Basically, you guys should have been warned for some of your posts with the current rules, if your ideas do get implemented Pat and Tallon, this Forum will be a graveyard if they take your own rules literally. No, it will not. Do not worry. |
| I like anime. |
Immahnoob said: if your ideas do get implemented Pat and Tallon Again, I'm not saying any ideas - I'm just trying to explain what the current rules are and how they are currently enforced. I see no reason for changing anything about this, I'm not asking for anything to be implemented or made different. I'm not sure why you and some others keep thinking I'm trying to say "it should be another way". I'm simply saying I disagree that anything needs changing in terms of the actual rules or enforcement, and all that really needs work is CONSISTENCY on the part of the mods. Which, for the most part they are, but because of recent additions to the staff we have three people who aren't exactly going to be consistent to board culture just yet. My entire point is that things are already set up fine - there are just some times when a mod, new or old, may do something you personally feel isn't fair, is too restrictive, or simply makes a mistake. All of which you can discuss with the mods in the IRC if you feel you were banned without real reason or discuss with mods in PMs if you were given a warning for something irrelevant. I've done this even back in the days of Kimura and such and they were very open to discussion and working with me on it, this applies to now too. That doesn't need change because, for the most part, there have been no big issues from that whatsoever as the mods typically do just fine at their own discretion with some very recent examples aside, as those examples are from a new mod who is genuinely just fucking up constantly and isn't a good way to read how the entire staff is. This place is pretty lax compared to most, to be honest. You can use anecdotal bullshit to claim otherwise but we'd all be perma-banned by now if I was wrong about that given the way you, mellow, myself, and many others are and get away with being like. I haven't been warned for any of my posts in this thread because of that same reason - and I feel the level of rule enforcement here is perfectly acceptable and the ability of the staff to actually put together all the pieces before enforcing rules is even better. Most sites have black and white 'dos and donts' - MAL staff will typically actually consider all the factors, including your personality and post history, all the context of the thread (typically reading whole threads to see how things ended up where they were for the reported posts), and so on before actually doing anything. If my idea was implemented this place would be the exact same as it is now - because my idea already is implemented as it's just "keep things how they are" (in the context of rules and enforcement). I don't know how many times I'm going to have to repeat this in different yet equally clear words. |
TallonKarrde23Oct 29, 2013 4:04 AM
|
| I've had so much fun reading all of these posts for whatever reason. The way I see it, this topic was created for us (and the mods, apparently) to try and define what the Policy on insults should be. With that in mind, I have to say that a policy is something that should be applicable to any case indiscriminately. Whenever an issue comes up there should be two stages to deal with it: a first judgement is made by an established system and then in the case where the context allows for an exception a second judgement should be made according to the mod's common sense (it shouldn't be relied upon, but we have no better). Of course, any system that we may come up with won't please everybody so I think it's necessary to decide who to please: - create a system where those who are 'easily offended' or new to the site can be assured to have a good time? - or defend instead the regular posters who simply think they've done enough to get away with anything? - what about those who do not care about insults at all? Should mods ignore insults altogether? I'm not saying all MAL users fit into one of these categories, I'm just using them as examples. What I'm trying to say is that we should also consider what kind of user benefits the most from the proposed solution and if the mods should be prioritizing said kind. The context-based judgements would allow mods to deal with the fallout of said system hopefully. |
"Rejoice! We are humans— we are the most talented people! Precisely because we were born without any ability— we can achieve anything— this is the will of the weakest race!" – Sora, ‘No game No life Vol.01’ |
Aloxamax said: I've had so much fun reading all of these posts for whatever reason. The way I see it, this topic was created for us (and the mods, apparently) to try and define what the Policy on insults should be. With that in mind, I have to say that a policy is something that should be applicable to any case indiscriminately. Whenever an issue comes up there should be two stages to deal with it: a first judgement is made by an established system and then in the case where the context allows for an exception a second judgement should be made according to the mod's common sense (it shouldn't be relied upon, but we have no better). Of course, any system that we may come up with won't please everybody so I think it's necessary to decide who to please: - create a system where those who are 'easily offended' or new to the site can be assured to have a good time? - or defend instead the regular posters who simply think they've done enough to get away with anything? - what about those who do not care about insults at all? Should mods ignore insults altogether? I'm not saying all MAL users fit into one of these categories, I'm just using them as examples. What I'm trying to say is that we should also consider what kind of user benefits the most from the proposed solution and if the mods should be prioritizing said kind. The context-based judgements would allow mods to deal with the fallout of said system hopefully. I choose "create a system where those who are 'easily offended' or new to the site can be assured to have a good time." |
| I like anime. |
Aloxamax said: A combination of 2 and 3.I've had so much fun reading all of these posts for whatever reason. The way I see it, this topic was created for us (and the mods, apparently) to try and define what the Policy on insults should be. With that in mind, I have to say that a policy is something that should be applicable to any case indiscriminately. Whenever an issue comes up there should be two stages to deal with it: a first judgement is made by an established system and then in the case where the context allows for an exception a second judgement should be made according to the mod's common sense (it shouldn't be relied upon, but we have no better). Of course, any system that we may come up with won't please everybody so I think it's necessary to decide who to please: - create a system where those who are 'easily offended' or new to the site can be assured to have a good time? - or defend instead the regular posters who simply think they've done enough to get away with anything? - what about those who do not care about insults at all? Should mods ignore insults altogether? I'm not saying all MAL users fit into one of these categories, I'm just using them as examples. What I'm trying to say is that we should also consider what kind of user benefits the most from the proposed solution and if the mods should be prioritizing said kind. The context-based judgements would allow mods to deal with the fallout of said system hopefully. If regular banter and insult flinging are too much for someone, they're always free to give Hummingbird a try. Of course, option 2 seems incredibly biased (whatever), but I would think regular posters would also be able to tolerate insults the same. But yeah, they're examples, so I'll just roughly skirt around those 2. And of course, the distinction between insulting and harassing needs to be mentioned. |
MellowJelloOct 29, 2013 8:24 AM
MellowJello said: A combination of 2 and 3. If regular banter and insult flinging are too much for someone, they're always free to give Hummingbird a try. Of course, option 2 seems incredibly biased (whatever), but I would think regular posters would also be able to tolerate insults the same. But yeah, they're examples, so I'll just roughly skirt around those 2. And of course, the distinction between insulting and harassing needs to be mentioned. A free promotion for Hummingbird. And it seems you are saying that MAL is built for people who like to insult. |
| I like anime. |
Pat_To_Do-List said: I'm saying the community is the way it is, and changing it to match Hummingbird's would just be the same as saying MAL isn't a community worth preserving.MellowJello said: A combination of 2 and 3. If regular banter and insult flinging are too much for someone, they're always free to give Hummingbird a try. Of course, option 2 seems incredibly biased (whatever), but I would think regular posters would also be able to tolerate insults the same. But yeah, they're examples, so I'll just roughly skirt around those 2. And of course, the distinction between insulting and harassing needs to be mentioned. A free promotion for Hummingbird. And it seems you are saying that MAL is built for people who like to insult. Oh, and Hummingbird allows free-throwing insults (I've been there). Their only real rule is "don't be a dick". Yeah. Mods are actually more lax there than here. |
MellowJello said: I'm saying the community is the way it is, and changing it to match Hummingbird's would just be the same as saying MAL isn't a community worth preserving. Oh, and Hummingbird allows free-throwing insults (I've been there). Their only real rule is "don't be a dick". Yeah. Mods are actually more lax there than here. So that we both know most users in MAL like to insult each other, then we have to at least make a better rule to warn these people about their bad habit. They are rude & they have to know it. What a rule they have there. |
| I like anime. |
Pat_To_Do-List said: -Muuse- said: Pat_To_Do-List said: So in the end, the people who live their everyday life with insulting others or insulted will use an insult as a "friendly" thing. So, I think the moderator should ban this kind of people. Wait, wait, wait, wait.... So, if I read this right, you're saying people who insult others, or are used to being insulted , will exclusively use insults as a "friendly" thing. What? Yes, you are right. Though I was wrong with "insulting others or insulted." It supposed to be "insulting others & insulted." This may be news for you, but last time I checked just because you use insults in a friendly way, a switch in your brain won't activate and prevent you from using insults in an aggressive way like they are meant to. |
 |
Pat_To_Do-List said: Or.. we could just reduce the current policy on insults and only notify them "if they're being a dick". And I would think people even in this thread, despite directing insults at each other, aren't dicks.MellowJello said: I'm saying the community is the way it is, and changing it to match Hummingbird's would just be the same as saying MAL isn't a community worth preserving. Oh, and Hummingbird allows free-throwing insults (I've been there). Their only real rule is "don't be a dick". Yeah. Mods are actually more lax there than here. So that we both know most users in MAL like to insult each other, then we have to at least make a better rule to warn these people about their bad habit. They are rude & they have to know it. What a rule they have there. And over at HB, they don't get instabannned for calling people idiots. In fact, were it not for their diabetic-inducing community coupled with the freedom to sling insults freely (to an extent), I'd probably be there right now. |
MellowJello said: Or.. we could just reduce the current policy on insults and only notify them "if they're being a dick". And I would think people even in this thread, despite directing insults at each other, aren't dicks. And over at HB, they don't get instabannned for calling people idiots. In fact, were it not for their diabetic-inducing community coupled with the freedom to sling insults freely (to an extent), I'd probably be there right now. That is not how a rule works. There has to be a punishment for their mistake. For what they have done wrong. Insulting for them is a habit. And old habits die hard. |
| I like anime. |
| I don't think your choices are the best Aloxamax, you're talking like you have to choose one instead of choosing more than one of your options. Those that are "easily offended" are either new to the Internet or are simply weak. There's no reason to insult them, but they're a minority. The new guys usually mind their own business. Most new guys I've met are exactly those that won't have a good time without a bit of derailing, most of the 2013 users do indeed suck. The regular posters shouldn't get away with everything either, there should be a limit, but the limit should be raised, I see no reason to ban people for things like "You're an idiot", "You're stupid", "You're an ignoramus", etc. No, they shouldn't ignore everything altogether, those that don't care, even better for them, they understand that insults are a part of everyday life, you'll always hear them and getting bothered by them is for the weak or those that can't argue it back. I'd say that we should mix the first two into something that would please the majority. The minorities are hard to please anyway, the Forums are made by the regulars in almost any case, without them this Forum would be dead. I have no idea where you've been Tallon, but this site isn't as lax as any gaming forums I've been on, Flash forums or any other Anime site forums. The reasons for why I have been banned in the past were mostly derails, I got away with my way of discussing by simply explaining that there's no way for me to change that (that is actually true), otherwise I have never been called out for flaming or insulting, only once when I exaggerated. The problem is that people don't like how the current rules are, most regulars agree that if you're that weak to get offended by "idiot" then you really have no place in a community on the Internet. The "limit" should be raised slightly. Anyway, could somebody tell me why insulting is wrong? Be it a person or an argument? I want to see you guys answer that without circular logic AKA "Being rude is wrong because it's wrong to be rude.". |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| Mods, obviously we're not convincing anyone of anything here, and you already have every position argued for. Let us know your decision and put this thing to rest before it gets to 20 pages. After all, we're trying to convince you, not other users. Immahnoob said: God, please this. The core of this entire thread is just this. Anyway, could somebody tell me why insulting is wrong? Be it a person or an argument? I want to see you guys answer that without circular logic AKA "Being rude is wrong because it's wrong to be rude.". Mod Edit: Removed reply to deleted post. |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 1:10 AM
| So it's not wrong if it's between people that know each other. What about insulting arguments? What about insulting people that don't know you but in a jokingly manner? What about people that get offended by everything? Why would anybody defend themselves from insults on the Internet? Do they feel the way they got called? Also, it makes no sense saying that useful conversation would be hard to achieve with a "hurt relationship", we have no relationship on the Internet, we don't know who is behind the screen, and feeling a certain way is only your fault, not ours. "Useful conversation" can be achieved even in a shitfest, insults are detached from debates anyway. Also, it's a better way of saying that an argument is bad. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: I don't think your choices are the best Aloxamax, you're talking like you have to choose one instead of choosing more than one of your options. Ah... I'm sorry if it seemed that way. What I was trying to say was that whatever changes are made won't be liked by everyone, so we have to take into consideration the kind of users that will like it and those that will dislike it. For example, if the mods choose to ban curse words and the like, a lot of people including you and me wouldn't like it. Would that be okay with the mods? Or would they prefer to choose something else in a effort to avoid being disliked by us? But if they choose something else, those that would have liked the first thing might dislike the second. A decision must be made and ultimately, some users are going to be valued more than others (by the system that is, we do have mods capable of reasoning and coming up with solutions on their own). Immahnoob said: Those that are "easily offended" are either new to the Internet or are simply weak. There's no reason to insult them, but they're a minority. The new guys usually mind their own business. Most new guys I've met are exactly those that won't have a good time without a bit of derailing, most of the 2013 users do indeed suck. The regular posters shouldn't get away with everything either, there should be a limit, but the limit should be raised, I see no reason to ban people for things like "You're an idiot", "You're stupid", "You're an ignoramus", etc. No, they shouldn't ignore everything altogether, those that don't care, even better for them, they understand that insults are a part of everyday life, you'll always hear them and getting bothered by them is for the weak or those that can't argue it back. I'd say that we should mix the first two into something that would please the majority. The minorities are hard to please anyway, the Forums are made by the regulars in almost any case, without them this Forum would be dead. Those were just examples mentioned throughout the conversations in previous pages, there are many kinds of users that we need to considerate, but for a mere change in insult policies we can expect most kinds to react similarly. Immahnoob said: Anyway, could somebody tell me why insulting is wrong? Be it a person or an argument? I want to see you guys answer that without circular logic AKA "Being rude is wrong because it's wrong to be rude.". Insulting isn't wrong, but it isn't right either. People of course will choose to act as if it were one or the other, so when they meet their opinions might clash. The way I see it, 'insulting' and calling someone a 'piece of shit' are different things. 'piece of shit' can be an insult but it doesn't need to be one. Insults are after all just a way of communicating one's negative intent. If the intent isn't negative, then I don't consider it an insult. In that case, 'insulting' could easily be seen as wrong because of the person's intent, but it would also be wrong to think of certain words as nothing more than insults. |
"Rejoice! We are humans— we are the most talented people! Precisely because we were born without any ability— we can achieve anything— this is the will of the weakest race!" – Sora, ‘No game No life Vol.01’ |
| I was recently banned as well for insulting a user on the News board. I too have a problem with the inconsistent enforcement of the forum rules and how lenient and how severe they tend to jump back and forth from. Mod Edit: Removed quote of deleted post. |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 1:09 AM
| I agree fully with this "If the intent isn't negative, then I don't consider it an insult. In that case, 'insulting' could easily be seen as wrong because of the person's intent, but it would also be wrong to think of certain words as nothing more than insults.". It just fits perfectly, but wait, let's make it even better. Let's all take insults with no negative intent. That way we don't care and we don't have to censor ourselves. Hail Education! We should just focus on the majority, rather than the minority. Yeah, I think using "insult" as it's actual meaning won't help us, really. Context is the most important, if we take it my way I'd say that most of what you see on MAL are not insults. And yeah, Shuhan, it seems we agree. They tend to slip a lot. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| Depends how insulting they are to be honest. Either way, they shouldn't be doing it in the first place. This is a community about Anime and Manga, not a place to be mean to one another. I'd personally just ignore anyone who's insulting towards me, they're not worth my time. But that's just my opinion. |
| ~nya |
| I think we should stop using the word "insult", and just focus on what Aloxamax said, rather than calling them all insults, call those that are actually negative about it, that truly are attacks on other people, that are there to truly offend other people. This isn't about ONE mod, this is about ALL of them, because of the rules ALL of them are being antagonized. Add the new mods to the rules and you have even a "better" outcome. Sometimes I laugh at how things turn out, it's too funny because after bans, the IRC gets filled with complaints. RadiShineAmigo said: Depends how insulting they are to be honest. Either way, they shouldn't be doing it in the first place. This is a community about Anime and Manga, not a place to be mean to one another. I'd personally just ignore anyone who's insulting towards me, they're not worth my time. But that's just my opinion. The MAL site is for Anime, Manga, etc, but if you check the description of each board, you'll see that there are boards meant for something else too. So yeah, it's pretty irrelevant. Mod Edit: Removed reply to deleted post(s). |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 1:07 AM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| @Battlechillpill Huh, all this "a little intent", "a lot more intent", "a tiny bitsy offended", "fuck you I am offended" talk is getting repetitive. Offended, out of the two examples, is the most irrelevant and hard to see too. People are offended by anything, even by taboo discussions, without any type of rational thinking behind it. An "intent" is easier to see, so why don't we just stay at that? Mod Edit: Removed reply to deleted post. |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 1:06 AM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: It just fits perfectly, but wait, let's make it even better. Let's all take insults with no negative intent. That way we don't care and we don't have to censor ourselves. Hail Education! We should just focus on the majority, rather than the minority. We would need to find out what the majority actually wants, and it's not that easy. We could speculate of course, or maybe use our ''common sense''? It's easy to tell that people over the Internet aren't anywhere near as restrained as they are in real life (most of the time), so while a lot of people could easily 'insult' others or call them names that most would take as an insult, they aren't as good at receiving the same kind of treatment. It's true that the Internet isn't for everybody, but that doesn't mean that we should shun those that aren't ready for it. Most websites prefer to be severe with insults because people don't tend to be turned away for not being able to curse, whereas the opposite case is true. If whatever changes to the policy made it more severe or lax, how many users would MAL lose? How many users could it gain by applying the change? Would the mods have to work harder because of it? Would it cost them time and god forbid even money? Can they allow themselves to focus more on it as of right now? In what mood would the remaining users be? Would they complain even more? Make rant threads or would they happily accept the new changes? Is there even enough people that care about the issue for this discussion to be useful? It's possible that I'm overthinking this as people tend to act more like sheep than individuals and therefore are predictable and nothing to worry over, but meh. |
AloxamaxOct 29, 2013 1:37 PM
"Rejoice! We are humans— we are the most talented people! Precisely because we were born without any ability— we can achieve anything— this is the will of the weakest race!" – Sora, ‘No game No life Vol.01’ |
| I think you missed the part when you give a reason for why you insulted that argument. So that means somebody else must censor himself, thus he's also offended because he can't have his own share of MAL, thus he also feels insulted because you're forcing him into something. Why? Why would it be wrong? They're the minority, maybe they should also try to change themselves before asking for so much. Then they're doing it wrong, that's why we're still at the level of "Your tastes are bad objectively" when talking on the forums. I don't seem to see how debates are harder when the relationship between two people is bad... From what I know, they get even better because people won't want to end it too fast. Let me rephrase then, rather than "relationships not existing" make it into "relationships are irrelevant on the Internet.", because there's no true hatred or true love or anything similar on the Internet, true as in the actual feeling. What about differentiation? I hate saying "You're illogical" all the time, it's getting repetitive, that's why I sometimes use "asinine" that is also an insult but nobody sees it as such for some reason. Mod Edit: Removed off-topic reference to another issue. |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 1:00 AM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Amaya-dono said: TallonKarrde23 said: in adra and pat's ideal world, everyone in this thread would be perfect vigilantes, would report you for that insult and you'd be banned.one is just a dipshit I worded it that way on purpose. |
|
More topics from this board
» Thread displaying incorrect thread creator after being movedNoboru - Sep 3 |
14 |
by Noboru
»»
40 minutes ago |
|
» About the profile views ( 1 2 )_Sunny_Day - Dec 12, 2023 |
50 |
by CC
»»
Yesterday, 2:24 PM |
|
» Am I supposed to wait or?kalepf22 - Yesterday |
2 |
by kalepf22
»»
Yesterday, 11:44 AM |
|
» Buttons not working when clickedcvbnm07 - Jul 28 |
19 |
by cvbnm07
»»
Sep 10, 9:47 AM |
|
» did anyone receive new badges yethime-tsubaki - Sep 7 |
5 |
by Fluffygreygrass
»»
Sep 8, 10:35 PM |