Code of Conduct Changes - Do better at least for optics

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

That being said many game forums (and others) dont have an off-topic simply becuase it can be difficult to moderate, and the use of resources, while they are not exactly wasted, could probably be optimized elsewhere.

I've been on the fence about this since the announcement, but as others have suggested, and I'm sure GGG has talked about, off-topic should probably just be eliminated. It's clear that GGG support doesn't have the correct personnel, or will, to do this properly. It can 100% be done, and off-topic has existed in relatively benign fashion, until 2016 (what a shock).

I have no idea why GGG is unwilling or unable to be more specific as to why or what the CoC changes manifested from, but now I'm not sure if that even matters.

So either kill it, or we play some ridiculous game of borderline conversation and even more borderline moderation. To what end? Some sort of digital forum Utopia where everyone agrees in a civil manner, about mundane topics? Cmon.

It's like Demolition Man. "You have be fined one credit for violation of the verbal morality statute"

A counter-argument, if I may.

There is value in an Off-Topic section for video game forums. I've seen a lot of claims of "if you're so desperate to talk about this stuff, just go to r/politics already, JEEEEZ". Leaving aside the fact for a moment that Reddit is a toxic waste stain on the face of the Internet with absolutely no redeeming qualities or values whatsoever...I don't want to talk about current events, or cool scientific discoveries, or philosophical quandaries, with random yaybos who have absolutely nothing to recommend them.

I would instead rather talk about that stuff with fellow gamers, people whom I know I have at least a broadly common viewpoint on, and who I can speak to in terms we all understand. The common thread of "Plays complicated internet game" acts as a filter that ensures a baseline level of commonality and thus a baseline chance of actually hitting it off or finding common ground that is entirely absent on any public fora which is solely and strictly about current events, or scientific discoveries, or philosophical quandaries.

I have no interest in what the teeming, filthy Reddit masses have to say on a subject (hint: the answer is everything, in the dumbest and most insincere way possible). I'm more interested in what my fellows have to say about it.

Not that it matters, of course. Anyone who sees this as anything but a warning that Off-Topic's days are numbered is bonko. Police your thoughts, fellow Valued Tencent Customers(TM). Your social scores will thank you for it.

"

aggromagnet wrote:

"

Karkas wrote:

Just gonna check out what happens...

Tiananmen square massacre.

Not trying to be edgy or incite conflict or anything, just curious to see if this gets taken down instantly , doesn't let me post or whatever (Or not). It's just too bloody strange they change this rule on freaking June fourth.

Improved it for you. You're welcome.

<Falling into the trap.>

I think massacres are bad and don't like them. When the authorities massacre people it is even worse. Now one time I sprayed ants and it was a massacre and it was really bad for the ants. The ant massacre is in a different category though. Tiananmen Square was more like the Kent State massacre in 1970 where four people were killed than the ant massacre at my house where many hundreds of ants were killed.

"

Turtledove wrote:

<Falling into the trap.>

Falling into, or setting up? Play nice, now.



Edit: Should have left Karkas’s quote in there for context. You can read up.

Their house their rules. I'm not gonna fall into trap of discussing the nuances. At the end of the day someone pisses me off in my house or place or work they aint coming back. I don't have to hang a conduct rule book on my front door.

Basically I can handle ambiguity, arbitrary and capricious.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Their house their rules. I'm not gonna fall into trap of discussing the nuances. At the end of the day someone pisses me off in my house or place or work they aint coming back. I don't have to hang a conduct rule book on my front door.

Basically I can handle ambiguity, arbitrary and capricious.

You're not asking thousands of people to give you hundreds of dollars a year for the privilege of hanging out in your house, are you?

"

Turtledove wrote:

I think massacres are bad and don't like them. When the authorities massacre people it is even worse. Now one time I sprayed ants and it was a massacre and it was really bad for the ants. The ant massacre is in a different category though. Tiananmen Square was more like the Kent State massacre in 1970 where four people were killed than the ant massacre at my house where many hundreds of ants were killed.

I disagree, the ants are alive too, they experience things just the same. That was probably terrifying for them.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

So I don't think they *want* to shut OT down altogether. It's just a fact that we now live in a world where certain topics just won't end well and so many of us can't escape them even in everyday life.

You know, while this statement may be true, i still think its one of the saddest things ive every seen younwrite on these forums.

Not being able to discuss something because an idiot somewhere will rant is not, imho, a reason to not talk about the issue.

-sadface
Matt.

I could point to the anti-vaxer community, but vaccinations cause an immune responce, and sometimes the result is inflamation. ;)

It was weirder that politics and religion were allowed in the first place. Back when gaming forums were a wasteland that would give a heart attack to contemporary "everything is toxic" - SJWs, many of them had already banned those two topics.

Secondly, rules always need to have a grey area in order to cover future events that either weren't thought of or there was no way of telling those would happen.

[Removed by Support]

[Removed by Support]

If you're a fan of censorship instead of discussion, then maybe you shouldn't be a part of any online communities.

"

pneuma wrote:

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

[Removed by Support]

[Removed by Support]

If you're a fan of censorship instead of discussion, then maybe you shouldn't be a part of any online communities. Internet would be a better place without your presence.

What I said to Anon got censored by a moderator. Should moderators be a part of online communities? Would the internet be a better place without them?

Personally, I don't think it's wrong to draw a little safe space and say "your kind aren't welcome here," because there's still plenty of other places to be welcomed in. But when people try to expand the boundaries of that "safe space" until they have an empire that stretches across more than half the Internet, that's when there's a problem. It's one thing to chase the shitpoaters out, and another to seek their extinction.