Rules/Infractions Speak now or forever hold your peace.

[makare]

Not true. The major from ghost in the shell is anime and there is nothing child like about her. heh.

Clumping all anime or manga under the loli fantasy type is just contrary to reality.

 

[Fun Size]

It was a joke. Deep breaths everyone.

 

[Gusto]

Not true. The major from ghost in the shell is anime and there is nothing child like about her. heh.

Clumping all anime or manga under the loli fantasy type is just contrary to reality.

Yeah but a lot of it seems to follow that general rule when it would be considered pornographic.

(I also no longer use the Browse feature on deviantArt.)

 

[Shannow]

heh, i love those mod notifications, though.

 

[Fun Size]

I might occasionally violate a rule just to get a PM from a mod.

I'm so ronery...

 

[Gusto]

 

[wana10]

she's 18 i swear!

Spoiler

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

My feelings about anime were made clear in Flame Wars(RIP)

 

[ThatGrinningIdiot!]

My feelings about anime were made clear in Flame Wars(RIP)

Everyone who watches anime are weeaboos(?)

 

[fade]

"I hate anime" is like "I hate cartoons" or "I hate movies". It's such a broad category, it's odd to think you could definitively hate it all.

 

[Fun Size]

"I hate anime" is like "I hate cartoons" or "I hate movies". It's such a broad category, it's odd to think you could definitively hate it all.

This. We now return to our discussion of the new rules, already in progress...

 

[Gusto]

This break in our regularly scheduled program was brought to you by WalMart.

 

[phil]

Cool. I think this should help keep things in order some. I for one, welcome our new point overlords.

 

[Dave]

New rules will probably go into effect sometime tonight.

 

[Ross]

Points? What are we, the Department of Transportation?

"Well, I only said three things worth 1 point this month, so I can still get away with one more before they get taken off." Yes, I know in the end it's up to the discretion of the mods how many points they get, but I always liked the more subjective approach we already had towards moderating the forums.

All in all, no matter what system you choose, there will always be flaws in it (some perhaps moreso than others). I can see how the points system might bring in a greater level of fairness and user-accountability when it comes to penalties, but I also see it as a huge waste of time when comparing the hypothetical results of the points system to the current moderation results. I feel that this is somewhat-analogous to a company switching from micro-management (everything is up to the mods' discretion) to corporate management (blanket rules for administration). These rules will kind of be a blend of both, but ultimately takes the form of corporate management. I prefer micro-management.

 

[Krisken]

Points? What are we, the Department of Transportation?

"Well, I only said three things worth 1 point this month, so I can still get away with one more before they get taken off." Yes, I know in the end it's up to the discretion of the mods how many points they get, but I always liked the more subjective approach we already had towards moderating the forums.

All in all, no matter what system you choose, there will always be flaws in it (some perhaps moreso than others). I can see how the points system might bring in a greater level of fairness and user-accountability when it comes to penalties, but I also see it as a huge waste of time when comparing the hypothetical results of the points system to the current moderation results. I feel that this is somewhat-analogous to a company switching from micro-management (everything is up to the mods' discretion) to corporate management (blanket rules for administration). These rules will kind of be a blend of both, but ultimately takes the form of corporate management. I prefer micro-management.

Generally I do too. Until there is that brother in law who doesn't do shit and pisses off all the other people in the company until no one wants to work there anymore.

 

[Shannow]

Points? What are we, the Department of Transportation?

"Well, I only said three things worth 1 point this month, so I can still get away with one more before they get taken off." Yes, I know in the end it's up to the discretion of the mods how many points they get, but I always liked the more subjective approach we already had towards moderating the forums.

All in all, no matter what system you choose, there will always be flaws in it (some perhaps moreso than others). I can see how the points system might bring in a greater level of fairness and user-accountability when it comes to penalties, but I also see it as a huge waste of time when comparing the hypothetical results of the points system to the current moderation results. I feel that this is somewhat-analogous to a company switching from micro-management (everything is up to the mods' discretion) to corporate management (blanket rules for administration). These rules will kind of be a blend of both, but ultimately takes the form of corporate management. I prefer micro-management.

Generally I do too. Until there is that brother in law who doesn't do shit and pisses off all the other people in the company until no one wants to work there anymore.[/QUOTE]

Speaking of...I have been meaning to talk to you, Krisken. I know you are married to my sister, but around the forums here....

 

[Krisken]

Generally I do too. Until there is that brother in law who doesn't do shit and pisses off all the other people in the company until no one wants to work there anymore.

Speaking of...I have been meaning to talk to you, Krisken. I know you are married to my sister, but around the forums here....[/QUOTE]
Josh?

 

[Covar]

Rules look good.

 

[Troll]

 

[Baerdog]

Good news, everyone!

These rules look pretty straightforward and reasonable and I think they will be a good thing.

 

[AshburnerX]

Seems fine.

 

[figmentPez]

[*][FONT=&quot]Hate Speech [/FONT][FONT=&quot]– We are a very open community and have many, many walks of life. We have people from many races, sexual orientations and religions. Knowing this, hate speech will not be tolerated. Racial epithets or slurs against sexual orientation are not going to be tolerated. If these are reported we will take action. At the very least a warning and 1 point infraction will be assessed, although it is up to the discretion of the mod to give more.[/FONT]

Is this rule going to be enforced roughly as written, where hate speech has to involve hostility (either intentional or inherent to the words used), or is it going to be an ultra-PC version where "if you disagree with a minority you must hate them"? I've been accused of hate speech, on these boards and elsewhere, simply for stating my religious beliefs when asked about them. I'd like to know, in advance, if I can answer honestly if someone were to ask if I think homosexuality is a sin.

 

[Dave]

[*][FONT=&quot]Hate Speech [/FONT][FONT=&quot]– We are a very open community and have many, many walks of life. We have people from many races, sexual orientations and religions. Knowing this, hate speech will not be tolerated. Racial epithets or slurs against sexual orientation are not going to be tolerated. If these are reported we will take action. At the very least a warning and 1 point infraction will be assessed, although it is up to the discretion of the mod to give more.[/FONT]

Is this rule going to be enforced roughly as written, where hate speech has to involve hostility (either intentional or inherent to the words used), or is it going to be an ultra-PC version where "if you disagree with a minority you must hate them"? I've been accused of hate speech, on these boards and elsewhere, simply for stating my religious beliefs when asked about them. I'd like to know, in advance, if I can answer honestly if someone were to ask if I think homosexuality is a sin.[/QUOTE]

It's all in context.

"I believe homosexuality is a sin." is NOT equal to "God hates fags!"

The first is acceptable, the second not so much.

 

[figmentPez]

It's all in context.

"I believe homosexuality is a sin." is NOT equal to "God hates fags!"

The first is acceptable, the second not so much.

Thank you for the clarification that this will be reasonable. I wasn't really expecting otherwise, but I wanted to be sure.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

I suggested in a PM to Dave - actually in a post in that negativity thread - a different solution. Somebody else in that thread cemented my idea for me. What this place needs is a constitution, one simple straightforward expression of what this place is about, and a Supreme Court to decide what is unconstitutional. And the only judge on the court needs to be Dave. Dave, you really need to be the Scott Kurtz, Joe Keatinge or Monte Cook of your own forum and be the tough guy. Mold this place as you want it to be. Unquestioned, unquestioningly. Dave's will is the way it'll be.

And so for me, the details of the rules are irrelevant. What works for you is what works for me.

Oh, and I mention Monte Cook because his forum was my "hometown," the forum I chose over PvP's way back when Kurtz started killing newspapers. His was a very lightly moderated forum, with the only rule really being "Don't piss of Monte." And because we repsected the dude, his forum thrived, both on topic and off-topic (and there were some heated political discussions there!)

 

[Allen who is Quiet]

It's all in context.

what's the official ruling on images that use the phrase "do it faggot"?

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

It's all in context.

what's the official ruling on images that use the phrase "do it faggot"?[/QUOTE]

It's directly implying that being gay means you're weak-willed, I don't know how it's not denigrating someone based on their sexuality.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

What if the image is a faggot of wood?

 

[Troll]

It's all in context.

what's the official ruling on images that use the phrase "do it faggot"?[/QUOTE]

It's directly implying that being gay means you're weak-willed, I don't know how it's not denigrating someone based on their sexuality.[/QUOTE]

I agree with CDS. Some people may find it funny, but it's definitely an expression using a hateful slur. I say it should not be allowed. I would suggest going the usual warning route for first time offenders.

 

[Bubble181]

Oh, shut the fuck up, fa...ehh....ntastic individuaL. *cough* :-P

Anyway, these rules stand or fall with moderator discretion. Even the seemingly very strict etc ones. Heck, the hentai thread got some (public) moderation, and after that, kept clear and so on. Yet, technically, you could've given a perma-ban. I think there's a big difference between what happened there, and someone really...Well, I dunno. There's a line there somewhere. Intent, and cooperativeness. Or something. Same for a specific joke thread - the curent language thread, for example. I can imagine a similar thread with the express point to break a certain rule- say, the "cite your sources" rule: people posting the most outlandish claims they can find with fake attributions to as respectabel people as possible, or whatever. Obviously, a similar "let's breal this rule" thread about, say ,the child porn rule, would be....Ummm...Np.

Anyway, I have faith in msot of the current staf, so I don't mind. Just be aware: being a mod wasn't something "desirable" so far - it carried responsibility with little actual show of power. With stricter moderation,we'll see more power displays from mods, and leaving them their discretion opens doors for people trying to make mod to abuse said powers.
No offense, but 2 out of the 3 (former? I have no idea if they're still mods there) NSFW mods I wouldn't trust with mod powers and their own discretion in general.

 

[TotalFusionOne]

I think this is going to lead with me p referencing all posts with NSFW.

Also, you might want to talk to some of the mods on SA and such who have been there for awhile and see how much they like these rules. I see a great disturbance coming if you guys haven't been under this yoke before.

 

[Ross]

Oh, shut the fuck up, fa...ehh....ntastic individuaL. *cough* :-P

Anyway, these rules stand or fall with moderator discretion. Even the seemingly very strict etc ones. Heck, the hentai thread got some (public) moderation, and after that, kept clear and so on. Yet, technically, you could've given a perma-ban. I think there's a big difference between what happened there, and someone really...Well, I dunno. There's a line there somewhere. Intent, and cooperativeness. Or something. Same for a specific joke thread - the curent language thread, for example. I can imagine a similar thread with the express point to break a certain rule- say, the "cite your sources" rule: people posting the most outlandish claims they can find with fake attributions to as respectabel people as possible, or whatever. Obviously, a similar "let's breal this rule" thread about, say ,the child porn rule, would be....Ummm...Np.

Anyway, I have faith in msot of the current staf, so I don't mind. Just be aware: being a mod wasn't something "desirable" so far - it carried responsibility with little actual show of power. With stricter moderation,we'll see more power displays from mods, and leaving them their discretion opens doors for people trying to make mod to abuse said powers.
No offense, but 2 out of the 3 (former? I have no idea if they're still mods there) NSFW mods I wouldn't trust with mod powers and their own discretion in general.

Granted, the thread itself did not SHOW CP, but the material was highly suggestive. There was a debate between myself and Mav as to how to moderate it... I felt comfortable with leaving it up because there was no visual representation of a child engaged in any sexual acts or posing, but he thought it should come down. In the end, it got taken down because I thought that it would be better to be safe than sorry in that particular case.

EDIT:
Also, I'm one of those mods that you mentioned, then ...Not that there's much to moderate there, anyway. GreenLantern should be taking care of the gay/male threads, and the only report I ever got for the NSFW forum came from the Anime/Manga thread.

 

[Bubble181]

Ross: I didn't complain; on the contrary - I was very happy with the way it was dealt with. I'm just saying: strictly speaking, you could've perma-banned JJ, which I'd have found overly harsh; despite the rule being questioned was what's supposedly the msot strict of all rules.

 

[ElJuski]

What if the image is a faggot of wood?

Yes, we get it. Faggot means other things.

Achievement Unlocked. 20g.