By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Cerebralbore101 said:
JWeinCom said:

This is a well known problem in law. Making rules that are very rigid makes them easy to skirt. I.e. if you ban a certain word people use synonyms. Making laws that are too open to interpretation make it harder to sidestep the rules but may allow too much discretion to whoever is enforcing them.

I doubt that the mods of a gaming forum, who do not actually make the rules, are going to resolve this problem.

If this actually causes a problem in practice then the rap example does not show it as nothing so benign has, to my knowledge, lead to moderation.

Are you saying the mods can't change or rewrite the rules? Because if that's true then this entire discussion is pointless. As the rules are written now they are entirely too vague and open-ended so that a moderator's individual bias ultimately decides who gets banned and who doesn't. BTW I really don't like that you said I should be banned for my paragraph on trans issues, while you spent about as much time arguing abortion. We both had the intention to move the discussion forward but for whatever reason I get accused of wanting to derail a thread and you get a pass? I really don't like it when other users assume they can read the mind of another poster and accuse them of something they didn't intend to do. Anyway it's extremely frustrating to me when you wanted more examples but become the example yourself. 

To my knowledge, no, the mods do not have the authority to rewrite the rules. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that. As I saw it when I was a mod, the site owners make the rule, and my job was to enforce them. If the rules were rules I disagreed with, I would stop being a mod, because it's not my site.

Someone else brought up abortion as an example of how anything could be considered hateful. I had to explain my stance on abortion to explain why the view is not inherently hateful. If anyone should be banned it should be person who brought up the topic of abortion, but I actually believe they initially did so in an attempt to actually give a pertinent example. Their follow up I think was more of an effort at a gotcha on me, but w/e. Point being, I obviously didn't mean to start an irrelevant conversation about abortion because I'm not the one who brought it up with no reason. If you think it was off topic then go talk to Julius about it. 

As for your post, it does not read as a genuine effort to further the conversation. You start by saying "I'll probably get banned for this" which sets an antagonistic tone. And really, the first sentence of your post would have been sufficient to make your point. We all know what you meant when you said "I think a lot of the mods here have decided that anything that doesn't tow the party line is a bannable offense when it comes to race, identity, sexual orientation, nationality, and gender identity." And even if you just added "for example saying sex and gender are the same thing", that would have been plenty clear. Instead you went on a whole rant about trans people.

So, a question which I imagine will go unanswered. If you had just said, "For example, sex and gender are the same thing and you are the sex you are born as". Would that have clearly described the type of speech you think is unfairly punished by mods? If so, and one example was sufficient, why did you give like 6 more? Why did we also need to know your opinion on trans athletes? On what situations gender affirming care is warranted? On pronoun usage? On how as an atheist being forced to use pronouns is the same as being forced to pray (which lol)? Really was describing all of that necessary for the purpose of this topic?

Clearly, you just wanted to get something off your chest about trans people. And you saw an opportunity to skirt the rules by trying to be like "Gee I'm not trying to start an argument about trans people, I just innocently wanted to provide some examples". Which is exactly why we need the rules to allow some flexibility. Cause otherwise people try that kind of bullshit. 

Which is kind of justifying the policies which if anything I feel are too soft. Because certain people just have to bring up their thoughts on LBGT people, or on whatever they consider wokeness at any possible opportunity. Take the conversation about the GTA VI reveal. It devolved into a conversation about what wokeness. Because on a gaming forum gamers apparently can't talk about one of the most anticipated games of the last decade without that nonsense. Just like we can't have a conversation about the moderation policy without someone saying "well let me tell you exactly how I feel about trans people". Because trans people live rent free in certain people's brains for some weird reason.

If I were to hazard a guess I'd say most people who left (for reasons other than the site being not significantly upgraded in years and the sales numbers becoming pretty meaningless) more likely left because, regardless of their political stance, they just wanted to talk about games, and that became increasingly difficult. We just don't hear from those users because they don't have an axe to grind and are probably just posting about games somewhere else.

What am I an example of exactly? I'm not a mod. I have no authority. If that's an example of the problem you're describing, then the problem clearly isn't about the mods. It's that you want a soapbox to stand on and if someone calls you out you whine about how you're being oppressed. 

Last edited by JWeinCom - 1 day ago