Poll: I'm not as good as you, and that should be ok

[vallorn]

I kid, I kid.
Mostly, I have no issue with the skill level of other people unless it's in a friendly competitive sense, however, There are times when someone is being so inept that it's cringeworthy, that's about the kind of time when I want to either get annoyed at them or teach them how to get better depending on their attitude towards everyone else (I'm not going to even try helping people who are being horrible AND bad at the game.)

In your case, I have no idea, I would say that it can come from a sense of frustration especially in team based games. There's a reason TF2 players look down on "Yet another sniper/spy/engie on last" because those players often drag the entire team down and make the game less fun to play for everyone else. There's also issues when it comes to people yelling online and doing stuff they would never dream of doing without being in that setting.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Discussion: Why is harrasing and attacking people for not being as experienced as you considered OK? And if you don't think it's OK, why isn't it considered a bigger deal?

It usually happens in team games where the less good/experienced person is holding everyone back or slowing them down.

If you're running an instance for the 100th time and suddenly you have a guy for who it's his first time you just want to get through as fast as possible because you know the correct route and order for everything, but the new guy might be drawing aggro from the wrong enemies, might be going the wrong way, or doing a whole host of other things that keeps screwing up your run or forcing you to constantly go back and help him. It can be annoying, especially if that person is oblivious to what they're doing wrong or doesn't care.

Take your example of payday - if it's a stealth mission then you should have picked a stealth loadout. Didn't pick a stealthy loadout? Well now you've screwed your team because if you end up raising an alarm (which you will because you're wearing 100 pounds of body armor) then your team has no way to win because they're all spec'd for stealth and can't beat the cops in a gunfight. You also can't change class once the game has started, so if someone starts with the wrong loadout it's a lot easier to just kick them and play with the bot. Is it polite? No, but it also doesn't seem unreasonable.

It's even worse in competitive multiplayer where a bad teammate can completely obliterate your chances of winning. Usually losing a game isn't such a big deal, but god help you if you're bad at the game and you go into a ranked match where people's k/d or win/loss actually matters because now it almost seems like you're purposefully sabotaging them, and you're being the asshole by going somewhere that you don't belong.

So in closing, harassing people for being worse than you is acceptable in online communities if those people have caused you problems with their crappiness/newness. Gaming is competitive, people's blood runs hot, especially if there is something on the line.

Should people be more polite and understanding? Probably. Are they going to be? Nope, especially not if they have to go out of their own way to do so.

As far as competitive multiplayer where your opponent is a dick to you because you're "not good enough," yeah, those people are just assholes. That's really not ok, and they're just trying to increase the size of their e-peen. On the plus side, you aren't losing anything by muting them since they're the enemy.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Hold on, what is wrong with dustloop now? That place has the best sources of info in the western world about airdashers and a very highly moderated community with little tolerance for idiocy and shenanigans. Their wikis alone are great to start up with and each character forum has its own mod and a topic full of advice and another full of combos and people sharing tech and you can even go to the matchmaking page and meet people who live near you to play with. Through that site I met a ton of awesome competitive folks who became friends wih me, I even personally know one of the admins. Are you sure you're not bein oversensitive here?

This was back in 06 or 07. Outside of that arcade experience this is my first foray into fighters. I was playing as Faust and wanted to learn how to play better. Yet I didn't know what terms were what yet so I was lost. I keep asking and one guy apparently took it personally, just bringing up my lack of knowledge in anything I posted. I kept reporting him but nothing was done about it. I just said "fuck it" and left . Left a bad taste in my mouth after that.

Hmm, that's unfortunate but one guy really shouldn't paint the whole website witha wide brush. Though to be fair I wasn't on the site till 2011 or so thus I can't speak about how it was back then. I know now it is not uncommon to get warned for being off topic too much, they're very strict with fooling around. Maybe it became this way to fix whatever issues there were before.

If you went there now, just the wiki has a huge section explaining all the terms for GG and a lot of fgc lingo as well.

 

[MHR]

It's not entirely ineptitude that causes a bad reaction. There is often a stubborn unwillingness to work in the team's common good. If you don't even want to try to learn or take a valid suggestion and instead always play the game the way you want to play it, you should be playing a single-player game instead.

People in TF2 don't very often kick in regular PvP games because nobody's likely to pay enough attention to what you're doing to notice you screwing around doing nothing. You must mean you've been kicked from Man VS Machine robot hordemode, or generally been hated on in DOTA. I can't say it wasn't deserved if you refused to play a better class. One or two people being useless in a 6-man team is often enough to screw over an otherwise good team for hours of attempts. It's not always them. You can't give off the impression that you're screwing over the team and not face some criticism for it. It's necessary.

And if it ever comes to a point that we've "progressed past" all the hate on internet gaming, it will only be because of draconian blanket-ban policies and making games like splatoon where you can't even talk to anyone in the first place. Screw that. That or games that require you to be at least [ Thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis ] blazed to play.

 

[Neverhoodian]

The following is part Devil's advocate, part rant. This isn't meant to condone caustic behavior, but it does provide some context for it, at least from my experience...

People get upset over newbs online because it negatively affects their play experience. Take TF2 for instance, my go-to multiplayer shooter. Ever since the game went F2P in 2011 there's been a perpetual revolving door of new players, many of which I suspect have never played a shooter before judging by their performance. They don't know where to go or what to do, and hardly any of them bother trying to communicate, much less coordinate. It doesn't help that Valve killed off community servers when they introduced Quickplay mode, which means you're pretty much stuck playing with these newcomers unless you go out of your way and single out good players to be friends with.

There have been times where I've had to stop my play sessions early, not because of real life issues or harassment, but because the sheer ineptitude of my teammates was driving me up the wall. Games are supposed to be fun, not exercises in frustration. One can only take so many instances of Engies building at spawn and Spies trying to butterknife sentry guns before I have to throw up my hands and walk away. It's especially aggravating when you've played your very best and topped the scoreboard, only to lose anyway because half of your teammates are absolute potatoes. As for MvM...there's a reason why I've hardly touched the mode for over three years...

Thing is, I used to try and be helpful. I'd make polite suggestions like "would one of our four Snipers please pick a different class?" and "can you please move your sentry up?" I'd offer to coach players and explain to them the basics to get them started. More often than not I'd get responses along the lines of "fuck you, I do what I want!" Now I don't even bother.

I remember one noteworthy match where someone went absolutely ballistic. We were on a potato team, and he was literally screaming at people over the mic for their ineptitude. While it was definitely rude and uncalled for, a part of me could sympathize with him. Hell, there have been instances where I've had the urge to do the same thing. He was a longtime player like me, and years of pent-up frustration witnessing the steady decline of overall player skill finally exploded. The game we loved in 2007-8 is gone, when the price for admission encouraged players to learn and improve.

 

[WolfThomas]

Funnily enough I find GTA Online of all games to be better in this regard. When doing missions if you have a mic, most other people with a mic will get a kick out of showing people how to do jobs they haven't done or giving them a ride in their helicopter. Most people are just excited to find someone who has a mic and isn't a kid (if the kid follows orders even they're cool).

 

[Bob_McMillan]

Where exactly is the poll?

Anyway, I come from the dark realms known as the Battlefield Community. And sad to say, I have just learned to live with all the elitism and such.

I have yet to experience in-game said elitism and snobbery, but once I did have two chatty Americans on my team who did nothing but belittle the rest of the squad, when I and the other squadmate were much higher than them on the scoreboard (using my pistol, even). Just because we didn't have mics, we were apparently the scum of the community and were ruining teamwork.

 

[ManutheBloodedge]

I am getting sick of people trying to remove spaces where people can just be jerks. Not saying people should be jerks, just that there should be places where people are allowed to interact with each other and not have to be nice. Sorry that not everyone is pleasant all the time, nor should they be. Being abusive isn't acceptable all the time in most spaces but there should be spaces where people can be rude and talk trash. For some of us thats part of the fun of gaming. The issue I have is inconsistent enforcement. It feels like some people can get away with saying whatever they want while others get punished for anything they say.

Not every gaming space should be safe. Some of us want places where we can compete with others and not have to be cordial. People shouldn't be forced to be nice 100% of the time they are visible in public. I don't believe people should be punished for every single statement they make ever just because people can trace their identity when they previously thought they were semi-anonymous. I usually prefer to engage in good sportsmanship and be friendly. Sometimes I want to talk shit back when someone talks shit. This doesn't make either of us bad people. I find it offensive when others insinuate that someone saying something negative is automatically a bad person.

Not everyone is friendly cuddly and polite nor should they be. To castigate, report, or otherwise punish others for interacting in a way you find to be anti-social is in effect sending the message that nonconformity to your standard of behavior will not be tolerated. I think this can be a bad thing. I'm not defending following someone and harassing them (it would be a straw man to imply that I was.) I am saying that talking major crap in a game space is part of the appeal to some people.

Personally, I think they need to start making game spaces in 3 flavors with all 3 being available in major games. I know this is a longshot that may be too messy or expensive to implement. I want to see chat rooms that are essentially safe spaces with heavy moderation and complaint feedback. I want to see standard chat rooms with less moderation but still censor out a lot of the over-the-top hostility. I also want to see a chat room or game space with as little censorship/filters as possible. If your conversation in one space is too harsh then you kindly get requested to move to the next space with less rules instead of people saying you're horrible, toxic and must leave this gaming community.
If you take away people's unsafe spaces they will make other spaces unsafe since it needs to come out somewhere. You can't alter human nature without subverting free will. Not everyone is going to be nice or friendly and thats perfectly ok. They have a right to exist too.


Someone may not be as nice as you but that is ok.

While I agree with you on principle, the problem here is that online gaming is not declared or labeled as such a place from the beginnig. There should be places where people can act how they want, and there are, but these are places that are clearly made with that in mind, and everyone about to enter can see that. Online gaming is no such case. The Problem is that people who only want to play without being toxic have no choice in the matter, they can't go anywhere else to play the game whithout being harassed. I recognize and accecpt your right to flame, but someone who doesn't want to experience while playing the game is shit out of luck. I don't think this is a case of trying to remove jerk spaces and more trying to CREATE jerk-free spaces, because I don't know any online game where you can play harrassment-free.

The logical conclusion to your argument is that there should be spaces for both people, spaces to enjoy a game how they want. So your idea of dedicated servers for flaming and non-flaming gamers would be the best solution. The way you write just makes it sound like the flamers were a threatened species turned away everywhere they go, when they are in the OVERWHELMING minority, in that they are no jerk-free spaces in existence. So again, this topic is less about taking away unsafe spaces and more about creating safe spaces in the first place.

Apart from that, I realize some people like winning, but when you can only enjoy a game as long as you win, you are playing it wrong. Even in team-based games, when you can only have fun when you win, that is your problem, your stuff to deal with, and you have no business making it someone elses problem. I realize it can be maddening when you have a bad player in a ranked match, but have some self-restraint for god's sake. Or play casual matches if you cannot handle the pressure. At the end of the day, these are still games. Games are meant to be fun. Or so I have heard.

 

[hermes]

Is it Ok? No. Shaming and segregating someone because they are not "up to your level" is not correct behavior. Is it natural? Yes, it has always been. People like competition and when the competition is not entirely dependent of their skills (like in most team sports), they tend to get frustrated with the other people. That is build into people, and build into the nature of games.

My advise would be to play mostly with friends, or focus on PvE games. At least that way you don't have to endure people that do nothing but play the game for dozens of hours a day and then act surprised not everyone is as serious as they are.

 

[Scarim Coral]

To simply put it, "they want to win" which usually follow "by any means possible".

For the OP statement, "means" is that the player should have a good experience or the same as the well experience players. The inexperience tends to botch up the match due to now knowing how to played properly to them.

This is usually worse when there is a prixed or loot for the winning team.

Yeah it's for this reason I tend to avoid playing PVP in general which is one of the cons on getting Battleborn or Overwatch.

Honestly, I think the companies that do make these sort of game should make a fair rewards but hey that is not what competitive gaming is about to them!

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

Let's start this off by saying I rarely play games online anymore. The only exception would be Splatoon. The main reason why is because there's no voice chat or PM for the Wii U.

And that's the issue I want to talk about. It seems that treating others like garbage for not being as experienced as them is like a common thing and it seems acceptable. But why? When I was younger, these assholes at some arcade during a trip one time actually tried their damnest to make sure I couldn't play other games cause I couldn't "prove my worth" in a fighting game(my first experience mind you). Nowadays if I try to play Payday 2 or TF2 I automatically get kicked from the server for not choosing the right class or not having enough EXP or the right hat. MOBAs are the worse these days. Yet people just go "that's how it is". No, it's not how it is or should be. How would you react if one kid in little league goes "I'm gonna find where you live and slit your throat because you can't pitch as good as me and you're always playing first base" to his teammate? You'd be mortified. But in online gaming it's like "that's how things are" or "they probably deserve it". I get the easy answer to this is G.I.F.T. but I don't buy it. I know another easy answer is blocking muting or reporting that person but it doesn't seem to work sometimes. And if it's in the middle of a match, if you leave you get punished as well.

Discussion: Why is harrasing and attacking people for not being as experienced as you considered OK? And if you don't think it's OK, why isn't it considered a bigger deal?

I am getting sick of people trying to remove spaces where people can just be jerks. Not saying people should be jerks, just that there should be places where people are allowed to interact with each other and not have to be nice. Sorry that not everyone is pleasant all the time, nor should they be. Being abusive isn't acceptable all the time in most spaces but there should be spaces where people can be rude and talk trash. For some of us thats part of the fun of gaming. The issue I have is inconsistent enforcement. It feels like some people can get away with saying whatever they want while others get punished for anything they say.

Why should anyone care about the people who want to be jerks to them? I really have to wonder why I should care if they have a space to relax by being jerks. Like... the defining characteristic here is they want to be an asshole to me or others. I'm finding it hard to see a perspective in which I should have sympathy for them.

Not every gaming space should be safe. Some of us want places where we can compete with others and not have to be cordial. People shouldn't be forced to be nice 100% of the time they are visible in public. I don't believe people should be punished for every single statement they make ever just because people can trace their identity when they previously thought they were semi-anonymous. I usually prefer to engage in good sportsmanship and be friendly. Sometimes I want to talk shit back when someone talks shit. This doesn't make either of us bad people. I find it offensive when others insinuate that someone saying something negative is automatically a bad person.

Okay but if you don't want to be polite to people what exactly do you give to them that they'd want to be sympathetic and let you have the place you want? The relationship you're asking for here seems very one sided. "I hurl abuse at you and in return you don't try to remove my ability to hurl abuse at you" seems to be the exchange.

Not everyone is friendly cuddly and polite nor should they be. To castigate, report, or otherwise punish others for interacting in a way you find to be anti-social is in effect sending the message that nonconformity to your standard of behavior will not be tolerated. I think this can be a bad thing. I'm not defending following someone and harassing them (it would be a straw man to imply that I was.) I am saying that talking major crap in a game space is part of the appeal to some people.

Why should someone show tolerance to someone being impolite or hurling abuse at them? I mean... it doesn't sound like the other party is showing tolerance, why should it be a one-way street?

Personally, I think they need to start making game spaces in 3 flavors with all 3 being available in major games. I know this is a longshot that may be too messy or expensive to implement. I want to see chat rooms that are essentially safe spaces with heavy moderation and complaint feedback. I want to see standard chat rooms with less moderation but still censor out a lot of the over-the-top hostility. I also want to see a chat room or game space with as little censorship/filters as possible. If your conversation in one space is too harsh then you kindly get requested to move to the next space with less rules instead of people saying you're horrible, toxic and must leave this gaming community.
If you take away people's unsafe spaces they will make other spaces unsafe since it needs to come out somewhere. You can't alter human nature without subverting free will. Not everyone is going to be nice or friendly and thats perfectly ok. They have a right to exist too.

You can keep hitting them with hammers when they pop up. It sounds like it'd be an exercise in frustration for the people that insist on being jerks to keep getting shunted. Seems like a good way to wear people down into quitting their behavior or quitting entirely.

Someone may not be as nice as you but that is ok.

The question is, why do you expect people to be extra considerate in return?

 

[MoltenSilver]

Is the abuse ok? No, no it is not. That said, I think it is fair to understand that by being the millstone on one's team they are making the experience worse for their teammates (unless playing in some deliberately-segregated area where goofy builds and trying suboptimal strategies is accepted, and even then one would expect the person to be putting their effort into winning). However unless someone is deliberately being a pain or not playing to their full potential the fault of that falls on incompetent matchmakers more than the weaker player deserving the blame. And to address a lateral issue, to self-proclaimed trolls who openly admit their mission statement is to agitate people who take games as 'serious business' and show them how silly they are I cannot adequately enough express my hatred for this mindset. Why is gaming worth any less emotional investment than anything else? If it is someone's hobby then trolling their game seems no different to me than going to some model train enthusiast, kicking up and breaking all their shit, and then saying they're taking it 'too seriously'.

On the other hand, going to far in the other direction:

Spoiler

Let's start this off by saying I rarely play games online anymore. The only exception would be Splatoon. The main reason why is because there's no voice chat or PM for the Wii U.

And that's the issue I want to talk about. It seems that treating others like garbage for not being as experienced as them is like a common thing and it seems acceptable. But why? When I was younger, these assholes at some arcade during a trip one time actually tried their damnest to make sure I couldn't play other games cause I couldn't "prove my worth" in a fighting game(my first experience mind you). Nowadays if I try to play Payday 2 or TF2 I automatically get kicked from the server for not choosing the right class or not having enough EXP or the right hat. MOBAs are the worse these days. Yet people just go "that's how it is". No, it's not how it is or should be. How would you react if one kid in little league goes "I'm gonna find where you live and slit your throat because you can't pitch as good as me and you're always playing first base" to his teammate? You'd be mortified. But in online gaming it's like "that's how things are" or "they probably deserve it". I get the easy answer to this is G.I.F.T. but I don't buy it. I know another easy answer is blocking muting or reporting that person but it doesn't seem to work sometimes. And if it's in the middle of a match, if you leave you get punished as well.

Discussion: Why is harrasing and attacking people for not being as experienced as you considered OK? And if you don't think it's OK, why isn't it considered a bigger deal?

I am getting sick of people trying to remove spaces where people can just be jerks. Not saying people should be jerks, just that there should be places where people are allowed to interact with each other and not have to be nice. Sorry that not everyone is pleasant all the time, nor should they be. Being abusive isn't acceptable all the time in most spaces but there should be spaces where people can be rude and talk trash. For some of us thats part of the fun of gaming. The issue I have is inconsistent enforcement. It feels like some people can get away with saying whatever they want while others get punished for anything they say.

Not every gaming space should be safe. Some of us want places where we can compete with others and not have to be cordial. People shouldn't be forced to be nice 100% of the time they are visible in public. I don't believe people should be punished for every single statement they make ever just because people can trace their identity when they previously thought they were semi-anonymous. I usually prefer to engage in good sportsmanship and be friendly. Sometimes I want to talk shit back when someone talks shit. This doesn't make either of us bad people. I find it offensive when others insinuate that someone saying something negative is automatically a bad person.

Not everyone is friendly cuddly and polite nor should they be. To castigate, report, or otherwise punish others for interacting in a way you find to be anti-social is in effect sending the message that nonconformity to your standard of behavior will not be tolerated. I think this can be a bad thing. I'm not defending following someone and harassing them (it would be a straw man to imply that I was.) I am saying that talking major crap in a game space is part of the appeal to some people.

Personally, I think they need to start making game spaces in 3 flavors with all 3 being available in major games. I know this is a longshot that may be too messy or expensive to implement. I want to see chat rooms that are essentially safe spaces with heavy moderation and complaint feedback. I want to see standard chat rooms with less moderation but still censor out a lot of the over-the-top hostility. I also want to see a chat room or game space with as little censorship/filters as possible. If your conversation in one space is too harsh then you kindly get requested to move to the next space with less rules instead of people saying you're horrible, toxic and must leave this gaming community.
If you take away people's unsafe spaces they will make other spaces unsafe since it needs to come out somewhere. You can't alter human nature without subverting free will. Not everyone is going to be nice or friendly and thats perfectly ok. They have a right to exist too.


Someone may not be as nice as you but that is ok.

I'm trying to understand if its just a matter of reading comprehension or interpreting words differently and tone wrong so as to not put words in someone's mouth, but

I am getting sick of people trying to remove spaces where people can just be jerks. Not saying people should be jerks, just that there should be places where people are allowed to interact with each other and not have to be nice. Sorry that not everyone is pleasant all the time, nor should they be. Being abusive isn't acceptable all the time in most spaces but there should be spaces where people can be rude and talk trash. For some of us thats part of the fun of gaming.

I'm really confounded by this idea of complaining that unsafe spaces are being 'taken away'. When did they deliberately exist in the first place? I'm pretty sure when Xbox Live first opened there wasn't some executive at microsoft cackling with glee at finally having somewhere he could cuss out people with zero consequences, it was just a result of moderation tools being in their infancy.

Not everyone is friendly cuddly and polite nor should they be. To castigate, report, or otherwise punish others for interacting in a way you find to be anti-social is in effect sending the message that nonconformity to your standard of behavior will not be tolerated. I think this can be a bad thing. I'm not defending following someone and harassing them (it would be a straw man to imply that I was.) I am saying that talking major crap in a game space is part of the appeal to some people.

I'm a bit confused here, you clearly state that their is a line of unacceptable behavior (stalking), my question is that if there is a line between unacceptable and acceptable behavior, then why do you feel in-game abuse falls on the 'acceptable' side of the line when other forms of abuse (such as physical abuse) do not? By saying 'following someone in real life is wrong' then you yourself are saying that there is a standard of behavior that people should be compelled to follow. And if there is a standard of behavior that everyone should be compelled to follow, then why is physical abuse not acceptable while emotional abuse is acceptable?

Personally, I think they need to start making game spaces in 3 flavors with all 3 being available in major games.

Who 'needs' to start doing this? Online game environments are privately-owned and -operated, if a company says "we are operating better by ruthlessly punishing anyone who says the word 'sprinkles'" then they are entirely within their right to ban anyone who uses the word sprinkles. If their clientele being emotionally abused drives away business then they are also within their rights to zealously punish antisocial behavior. If this is such an unfulfilled niche then you'd think someone would be making money hand-over-fist operating a 'all trash-talk welcome' server. It's not going to happen so long as even hearing rumors about abuse being acceptable within one's game, segregated or not, turns off potential new players and their wallets.

If you take away people's unsafe spaces they will make other spaces unsafe since it needs to come out somewhere. You can't alter human nature without subverting free will. Not everyone is going to be nice or friendly and thats perfectly ok. They have a right to exist too.

Does it have a right to exist? Free will is subverted all the time for the greater good: I'm not allowed to forcibly silence my neighbor's noisy dog regardless of how strongly my free will tells me I should, nor is my struggle to resist that impulse some great challenge that destroys me as a person. It is a thought that comes into my head, and is subsequently squelched as a bad thought to be discarded. And if someone does have trouble controlling that, that they can't get through the day without feeling the need to lash out at someone, that they get pleasure from abusing others, my first thought isn't "this person needs a place where it's to vent", it's "this person needs a psychiatrist and is possibly a sadist or a sociopath". The idea that cathartic release is a healthy way to deal with anger has been debunked time and time again as only decreasing one's ability to maintain self control because the person becomes conditioned to react with extreme outbursts. (source: in summary: http://blog.uwgb.edu/alltherage/four-questions-on-the-catharsis-myth-with-dr-brad-bushman/
the full paper it references: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bbushman/bbs99.pdf )

To sum up:
Why is emotional abuse ok when you say that other forms of abuse are not?
Why do you feel people have the right to have some space where they can emotionally abuse others?
Supposing that it was ok, why should online game companies be forced to cater to this niche?

 

[Maximum Bert]

Im not sure its considered ok as in yeah its fine to do that more that its ok in that you are not committing an offence by flaming someone as long as its not sustained vehemence or something extremely serious like your example of someone coming up to you in real life (or online) and saying with serious intent I am going to slit your throat.

As for why more isnt more being done about it well I am not sure there is much they can do except extremely limit your interaction and/or massive policing of comments which is unfeasible economically and carries some ethical considerations.

Thing is people are both horrible and nice some more one way than the other but you never know how they will mix or what will set someone off on one. I just tend to ignore the ones I dont like as much as possible even had a few death threats online (because I beat some people online) they just got blocked after I had a good laugh at their voice recorded rant and sent them a smiley face reply.

I dont think its often considered a big deal because most of the time it is not yes it can make things unpleasant on occasion but rarely is someone going to get hurt. Personally I think its only a problem if their is sustained attacks with malicious intent or actual serious threats.

 

[Pseudonym]

When I play online these days, I ussually play with friends and block out all other chat. On rare occasions I take allong my flameshield and mace of muting and go online alone.

I don't really have much to add to the discussion besides the advice to play with friends if you have the chance. That way you know eachothers sense of humour and you know they will be respectful and you can just ignore the other people you find online.

 

[Yoshi178]

one should stay off the internet if one can not handle the banter. :3

 

[felbot]

Because you suck at video games that is why, how are you ever gonna get better at them if you never find somebody to get better than?

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

There were a lot more spaces where people could say what they wanted freely. Warcraft 3 lobbies were wonderful- you could say whatever you wanted about whatever you wanted to say and there were no fascist bans or castigation. If someone offended you you muted them and it was done.

That's a rather hyperbolic use of the word fascist. People not letting you be a jerk in a place you don't own is hardly fascist. Rather it seems overly entitled to think you have some inherent right to be rude without repercussions in the form of bans from those than run the place. Repercussions in the form of castigation are also fine, it's returning your gift in kind.

People should have the right to a space where they can verbally express themselves as they want.

Why the hell should they have such a right?

People have a right to offer such places. But if no one does, sucks to be the people who want one because no one owes it to them. They don't have a *right* to such a place nor should they. They only have what's offered and I see no reason they should deserve anything more. I can see a reason for people to deserve not to have verbal abuse hurled at them, but why should anyone deserve approval for hurling verbal abuse?

The only reason I agree to any limits is because human nature allows people to exploit cases of free expression and utilize them to their advantage. Just because we have limits on free expression doesn't mean that every limit of free expression should be. tolerable.

It's nice to day not every limit should be tolerable. But that's vague. It doesn't argue against or for any particular limits. It's the equivalent of saying 'There should be rules in society but not every potential rule is tolerable'. It doesn't say which are intolerable and why.

Being able to be mean in some spaces is a right

Sure if you mean public places to a limited degree. In privately owned spaces it is at the whim of the owner and thus not a right.

I didn't say they should be forced to cater to it. some should be able to cater to it without people freaking out. You can pick apart my use of the word need but I still think it would end up being a good thing.

Why should they be able to without people "freaking out"? It's their right to freak out.

You haven't really explained how it's a good thing aside from 'human nature' which is a very vague argument.

Some people are very intolerant of intolerance and I find that amusing.

Can you make an actual argument for why I should be tolerant of it? I'm not seeing how it benefits me or why it would be wrong to be intolerant of it. (And please don't give me some lame bland assumption that I ever said all intolerance is bad. Not saying you will but many don't seem to understand that it isn't an all or nothing proposition. For instance intolerance of murder and pedophilia is great)

It seems to me if you ask to be intolerant of someone on a whim or for lulz then you have no grounds to ask them to be tolerant back.

If you can't sympathize for all the various situations that cause someone to wish to not be nice and have a space to vent.

They don't seem concerned with sympathizing with the people they hurl abuse at. Why should they receive more I'm return?

Those that are talking down and seeming haughty over people being jerks and thus inferior should really CHECK THEIR PRIVILEGE.

What particular privilege is that? Just using it as a buzzword is kind of meaningless

Not everyone has access to the life experiences or assets to be able to react to everyone in a positive socially acceptable way every time, even in stress.

Guess they better learn to react better if they want to be treated better, eh?

This reminds me of the worst kind of stuff I've seen on tumblr. Where people try to claim that a mental disorder makes their abusive or manipulative behavior a-okay. Fact is, it can make behavior understandable, but it should not be seen as acceptable. People should be expected to try to change, given some leeway MAYBE, but not indulged as you're asking. And that's if I think they have some kind of mental disorder, not just poor self-control which seems to be the people you are arguing for.

So yeah, no. If someone is stressed and makes a mistake that's one thing. You are arguing that it isn't even a mistake and should be accepted.

To look down on those that are offensive shows a lack of empathy for those that think and feel differently than you.

No it doesn't, it shows the intelligence not to accept being in a one sided situation.

What you see to be ignoring is reciprocation. You treat people like shit, you shouldn't expect them to care about what you want or what makes you happy. You ask for tolerance for people who will show none in return. Sorry, but as far as I'm concerned when someone slaps you then says you should turn the other cheek and not retaliate, first thing I think is it's a con. Who gets all the benefits in this situation here?

We had a lot more places to came and chat and say whatever we wanted without people freaking out. Those spots are indeed shrinking in number. I have the right to want them there and I'm not a horrible person for wanting horrible people to have the right to express themselves.

I mean, within the confines of the code of conduct, it's really not something anyone can argue with you on whether it makes you a horrible person.

But I can say you do have the right to want it. But you can want anything ranging from coffee to genocide so that's irrelevant. Personally I don't think horrible people deserve anything of the sort.

For example I find meat offensive and people talking about it seem to me to be horrific monsters who kill animals to live like psychopaths. I am honestly offended by this practice. I feel emotionally abused when people discuss meat around me without consideration of my feelings. It bugs me when people talk about bacon all the time. I respect their right to kill animals and eat them and talk about it. just because I find it offensive to the point where it sometimes nauseates me does not mean i believe the people that do it are truly monsters inside- they are just a product of their value systems and shouldn't be shamed hated or castigated for that.

Personally it kind of sounds like you're just saying this to make a point.

But either way, I am perfectly fine with judging whether someone taking offense is reasonable. Personally I don't think the meat thing is reasonable and I doubt most other meat eaters would.

Emotional abuse is acceptable when physical abuse is not because emotional abuse is a result of free expression and curtailing the right to do it causes more harm to everyone than the good it provides to those it may protect.

Can you in fact detail what harm is caused in this instance?

Besides there is no right to free expression on private property, at least not to the extent you think there is.

To limit the right to be rude is to limit the right to express yourself and limiting that is a harm to all of society.

It's easy to make vague proclamations about harm to society. Now actually demonstrating how enforcing a degree of politeness in games harms society... that's something you have not done.

You can;t get rid of all "bad" people and acting like you should is ethically alarming.

Who are you talking to? Did anyone talk about 'bad' people, or are they talking about people who DO certain things?

You can't eliminate someone's right to think evil thoughts or be a bad persons o long as they follow the law. Rearranging laws to eliminate the ability to offend entirely is tyranny and directly offensive to me.

This has certainly gone on a weird tangent. Who is talking about laws?

Removing the right to offend is ultimately removing the right to dissent. They are inextricable. You can only protect the rights of the oppressed if you have the right to dissent.

We're talking about hostility in a game. Sorry if I'm not convinced the right to dissent in a game is important. (Nor that it exists as a right)

People have been rude and abusive since at least the dawn of recorded history. It would be nice if everyone didn't talk about the things that causes me physical revulsion but I tolerate it like I expect others to tolerate ( not eliminate from society) my rougher edges.

Dawn of history is irrelevant. Logically it has no relevance whatsoever.

Well its fine if you think that exchange is equivalent. I don't though and you don't get to decide such things in a one sided bargain. Go ahead and try not to tolerate meat eaters.

Removing all The venues where people can express themselves in ways others find distasteful is ultimately removing peoples right to be themselves. Just because we must subvert free will for people's safety does not mean we need to subvert it for comfort. I draw my line in a different spot than

No it isn't at all, people can be themselves elsewhere. If they get shunned for it, thems the breaks. You aren't owed acceptance.

It also isn't subverting free will. You make your decisions anyways, no one is owed a lack of consequences. (Free will doesn't exist anyways)

I will value free expression over comfort. I think those that value comfort over free expression do not understand the long term repercussions of UNNECESSARY abridgement of free expression. Forcing people to be nice does not make people more nice.

It clears the room of unpleasant people. It seems perhaps you don't get the point. I don't care if they're nice. I care if I don't have to deal with their BS. And forcing them to be nice accomplishes that. So it gets exactly what I want.

Not having a space where people can express themselves in a way others find offensive is a form of oppression.

Not automatically, no.

I just reject the notion that we shouldn't reciprocate their... 'benevolence'.

You may not like what others say but when you remove their right to say it you are causing more harm than good.

Except they have the right. Just not on someone else's property if that person says no. What do you have against private property.

Not tolerating other's rights to express themselves seems like an elitist attitude

Is that supposed to be a reason not to do it? That you think it seems elitist? Personally I don't think it matters if you find it elitist. You have failed to come up with a good reason except rights that don't exist in the context you claim they do.

As far as finding spots that are harassment free goes; they still tend to have punishments. What places still exist where you can play and talk whatever unfiltered shit you want and not be reported or listed? I still think making safe rooms, normal rooms ,ad unfiltered rooms may help the issue. Sometimes someone wants to play a game when in a bad mood and not be polite.

And why should I care about them having a place?

That Bushman paper is questionable. Many social scientists still maintain that catharsis can be effective in some contexts. Besides it didn't deal with online outbursts. Bushman's finding could say that games increase violence too btw.

And where is your study? What supports your claim?

It really sounds like some people want to get rid of all bad people in this world and never tolerate any doing anything that others may find displeasing.

Only of you exaggerate. You're blowing things out of proportion. We are talking about private property. We are talking about games.

Every dystopia starts with people trying to remove that which they find undesirable from this world. what should happen to people that say things you find offensive? Should they not exist or simply not be allowed to speak. If they shouldn't be allowed to work then they should starve?

Sorry can you name those dystopias? Also did you know all dictators didn't die young? Does that mean people who don't die as children are the start of dictatorships?

Also they should be kicked out of the current situation if they're being rude. Sorry if you think bolting rude people is the start of a dystopia.

I'm not asking people to be considerate to the less considerate. I am asking you to tolerate their right to exist.

That's not true at all. You are asking for more. No one is saying they can't exist.

People shouldn't NOT EXIST or NOT COMMUNICATE EVER just because their expressions are disagreeable. And saying people should be inclined to eliminate their spaces where they can express themselves is part of the problem. There is no answer that will make everyone happy.

Not communicate ever? If all they can do is be disagreeable I think they have issues that a psychiatrist may be needed for. But really, you're just exaggerating. No one said they should never communicate.

Some people aren't as emotionally or morally as good as you and that's ok

If people want to act like their moral deficiencies are fine then I don't have to tolerate them and that's okay!