Code of Conduct Changes - Do better at least for optics
" Oh, you must be be talking about the 822 page rant on president trump. SSF, because Path of Trade RMTers and bots suck.
|
|
" It's basically a rule that almost every company with the freedom to chat or speak incorporates, so they can put their, "We don't like the shit you've posted so we're taking it down rule." SSF, because Path of Trade RMTers and bots suck.
|
|
|
You could even start an inflammatory post regarding the game and they could still choose to remove it. Just look at the development manifesto. That's inflammatory and enraging as hell.
SSF, because Path of Trade RMTers and bots suck.
|
|
|
When you can't handle the heat, the best thing to do is close the kitchen.
As this is a gaming site, I can sympathize with GGG's decision. Depending on where SCOTUS and the EU go in terms of rulings and laws, GGG may just have to close Off Topic completely to stay within the laws of where they do business. The code of conduct will have to specify whether walrus tossing is inflammatory. PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
|
|
|
It will also be interesting to see which topics they pick and choose to delete or warn people about in chat. There are a whole lot of things people talk about that ultimately fall under the Politics umbrella.
I have a pretty good sense of humor. I'm not German.
|
|
|
I love GGG.
And Papa. Last edited by GUENWHYEVER#0334 on Jun 4, 2019, 11:05:36 PM
|
|
" While I agree GGG has every right to regulate what is said on their forums I think the rules should be clear on issues. This rule seems knee-jerk to a recent Trump thread and the wording of it leads to ambiguous territory. In defense of GGG they did issue 4 warnings in that post to follow the previously stated rules. The people who broke the rules already laid out should be held accountable for doing so, but to prevent all future political or religious discussion because people can't behave themselves is a little extreme. I would be fine if the rule just said no religion or politic talk because that is not ambiguous and this is a video game. |
|
" I'd be all for closing it at this point. Once you start arbitrarily policing free thought and open discussion of common topics rather than individual behavior, it's pretty much all downhill from there. There are simply way too many things that could be considered "inflammatory", especially by a moderator just having a rough day already. I have a pretty good sense of humor. I'm not German.
|
|
" Maybe, they want to do it gradually. I can see the reasons for that. Also, that other thread got closed pretty fast, lol. (⌐■_■)
|
|
" The main problem is that the rule is far, far too vague. Does it only apply to "real world" topics or game-related topics as well? Any kind of trade/AH topic is inherently inflammatory at this point (not that we actually need more of them). Discussions about loot boxes are also inherently inflammatory, both from a game perspective and as a political topic. Climate change, privacy issues, corporate governance, etc, etc. Where does the rule actually start, and where does it end? I have a pretty good sense of humor. I'm not German.
|
|
