Again mate, you're not the one who makes that decision. The community as a whole makes the choice to report and the mods who make the final decision.wulf3n said:
Jimquisition: I'm Going To Murder Your Children
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No it's a group or individual within the community that felt said post broke a rule as they understood it and the mods who make the final decision.maddawg IAJI said:
If it was everyone within the community it would require the entire community to flag a post.
Which is why the "Bystander effect" doesn't apply. It is not my responsibility because I am not needed.
But if you really want me to start flagging every post I deem to be offensive just let me know, you'll receive a heap of flags, but It's our responsibility [insert patriotic flag waving in the background]
We're going way off topic now anyway. I guess we're both getting a flag now.
note: By "you'll receive a heap of flags" I don't mean your posts will be flagged, merely that you'll have to deal with an influx of flags.
Or, other people can report it, because they don't enjoy seeing people bullied or harassed online. It's not just the direct target of such actions who suffers - it's also those of us who read that bullshit in our forums, degrading the quality of our experience.wulf3n said:
Should the victims of spam messages (which have actually appeared in this thread), who buy the spammed products be the only ones to report spam? Or should other members report the spam when they identify it, to help get rid of the spammers?
Except here's the problem. One report doesn't cut it on the Escapist. Multiple reports are required, the more the more likely responsive actions will be carrying out. People have gotten away with saying blatantly insulting things before, most likely because not enough people flagged it. Also, doing it isn't really that much of a hassle. Two mouse clicks are all it takes.wulf3n said:
Evidence?erttheking said:
I'm not saying you're incorrect. But the forum systems I've been a part of have always treated all "flagged" posts equally, regardless of the number of people flagging.
Looking at this post:
It would appear a single report is all that is necessary.maddawg IAJI said:
Actually yeah, right here.wulf3n said:
Report button? How does it work?
If the offending post is reported twice (That is, the report button has been clicked twice.) the offending post is sent to a queue known as the 'mod queue'.The more reports it gets the higher up the queue it goes and the moderators will pick it out and hand out the deserved wrath.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.112832-The-Banhammer-and-You-A-Users-Guide-to-the-Forums
It really seems like more than one flag is needed. And the more flags it gets the faster it gets dealt with. Which is good for people who are being especially problematic.
That is why I would hire off-duty police or private security forces. Police are allowed to carry at all times, even off-duty (depending on local laws).Aardvaarkman said:
To the second point, the people making the death threats have already escalated the situation to that level. I do not know who is crazy and who are just annoyed. I can not know what their intent is, so I will take extra precautions.
"Death threats are bad." Way to go out on a limb, Jim. Good thing you made this video so the .000000001% of people responsible for this will see it and immediately stop being lunatics. Also appreciate you grouping the whole of anyone who has ever played a video game as being responsible for death threats sent to a dev, as if even death threats to public figures are somehow wholly unique to people who play video games and are not at all a thing that's been happening since the invention of postal service.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it doesn't work that way. I'm pretty sure that the people who established this site are smart enough to tell when a single person is smashing the report button over and over again.wulf3n said:
Somehow I don't think they have a problem with it now. You'd think one guy getting reported fifty times when he's not doing anything wrong will set off some alarms.wulf3n said:
1... there is an important distinction between a threat and the actuality, the fact it's from socially misanthropic neckbeards notwithstanding
2... after all the crap gamers have been put through eventually they were going to snap, the fact that the ones snapping were misanthropic neckbeards notwithstanding.
In conclusion, threatening people isn't cool, but this is hardly worth an episode. Why? Cause jerks will be jerks and dignifying them with attention is a waste of time because it will have zero effect.
2... after all the crap gamers have been put through eventually they were going to snap, the fact that the ones snapping were misanthropic neckbeards notwithstanding.
In conclusion, threatening people isn't cool, but this is hardly worth an episode. Why? Cause jerks will be jerks and dignifying them with attention is a waste of time because it will have zero effect.
Not where I live, they aren't. Also, it's still up to the convention venue whether to allow them in. As I said, any sane convention would not allow firearms through the door, and that's their right, off-duty cop or not.Gilhelmi said:
It must be a pretty insane place to live where just because somebody's an off-duty cop they are allowed to carry concealed firearms. Even on-duty cops don't conceal their weapons. The idea that people would be able to walk around with concealed weapons at a convention (or anywhere) is seriously problematic.
And what crap would that be? Publishers releasing games you don't like? Being privileged enough to afford computers, game consoles, software, and having enough free time to play those games?Deadcyde said:
Cry me a river, doesn't seem like much of a hardship to me.