Poll: New forum rules - Yay or Nay?

[Canid117]

I also got warned for a picture I posted that was NOT pornography. Yes, it was racy, but it was FAR from porn.

That happened to me once too. You know that duct tape demotivational with the girl in her underwear sitting in a chair? That is porn apparently.

Wow, how kinky. The picture I posted wasn't porn AT ALL. It was racy to be sure, but nowhere NEAR porn. Thus, I find it rather harsh.

Yeah it seems that there is a very conservative mod on the escapist somewhere. Or at least one who hates the sight of womens underwear.

Also are we not allowed to voice our displeasure at Captchas anymore?

Underwear is of the Devil, didn't you know? I hate the Captchas *looks around in fear*

Try as I might I could not find a picture of Satan on a pair of underwear and the results I was getting scared me away from trying.

As for seeing warnings and probations get erased, currently it's not going to happen. We are holding people accountable for their actions and we feel 8 strikes is more than enough. 99.9% of the forum members don't have more than 2 warnings (if I'm not mistaken, 82% don't have any infractions). If people can't learn how to be respectful towards others and follow very simple rules, they won't be here for long. Everyone has a bad day but even off of the internet, if you do something stupid on that bad day, you are held accountable. The same goes for The Escapist forums.

I do agree with you, however I do feel it's a little harsh to NEVER forgive people for even the tiniest offenses.

That may change in the future BUT for now, everyone should think it isn't going to happen.

But we are such an idealistic bunch! And even if we shouldn't think it will change the negative reaction on this thread gives the impression that it will at least be a hot issue for a long time.

I'm starting to think they've deliberately rolled this out with the intention to introduce decay of naughty points later. Trying to soak up hate against the rule change (oh, excuse me, "update") then dispose of it so everything else slips in with less notice, like the punishment for the eighth mortal sin; ad-blockers.

GASP! What other horrid conspiracies could the mods be behind!

 

[Qizx]

Also, I'm already on my fifth strike, despite only having one warning and one probation.

I was suspended, but it was removed so I'm assuming it was stricken from my record.

This intrigues me, did they say that they took back what they did? Or did they simply say it was over?

 

[Jamienra]

Meh, they're not that much different. I say Yay!
Gets rid of all the ZP douches who post before watching the video.

 

[googleback]

I'm afraid of posting anything humorous now. THAT'S the problem. I dont EVER attack or slander, even when it happens to me, it just feels a little bit Helghast up in here all of a sudden...

 

[Saulkar]

The only reason I typed I agree is to say here that I DO NOT AGREE! They are too constricting, too overbearing. Every comment you make could be misinterpreted and used against you. Combined that with the fact that nobody is perfect, I doubt ANYBODY would be able to go 5 years and 10000 posts without racking up a series of permanent minor infractions ultimately leading to a ban. The more rules you put out the more responsibility you take away from people and the less they listen to you out of obligation and instead out of fear of repercussions. Additionally moderator bias makes it all the more easy to be banned now with stricter rules. With such strong rules really hot topics and ones of EXTREME controversy may appear less than ever. Now who does not love some vulgar controversy? I personally would not have this strong of an opinion against it if it was made clear the your health meter replenishes over time but since it was made clear it does not that means time is the only the only thing between you and a ban. Ban me for having an opposing opinion! Aggressive comment yes, offensive in any way, I do not see how?

EDIT: I still want to post but I want to do so knowing I do not have a permanent tattoo above my head saying what I did wrong long ago combined with a series of stamps just waiting to bring down the judgement before the ban with no hope for redemption.

 

[Ladette]

I'm vaguely reminded of the realID debacle on the old WoW forums. Everyone told Blizzard it was a bad idea but they tried to push it through anyways. If most of the community is against something then i'd take their advice.

Now this isn't intrusive and as insanely moronic, but from where i'm sitting it seems to be far from a good decision.

 

[Euphbug]

The forums health meter is a dicey system as such I well go for Some yay as it looks decent but only time can truly tell.

Though as far as I go since I have so little times that I see something I feel I must post in it will probably not affect me that much.

 

[Inglip]

Also, I'm already on my fifth strike, despite only having one warning and one probation.

I was suspended, but it was removed so I'm assuming it was stricken from my record.

This intrigues me, did they say that they took back what they did? Or did they simply say it was over?

It wasn't the mods that suspended me, it was the appeal board. I talked to Spinwhiz, and he cleared things up for me. In the last PM he sent me, he said:

Sounds good. The suspension should have been reversed.

I took that to mean it would be taken off my record. Normally I wouldn't be bothered, but with these new rules I'm in the yellow for something that should have been a warning at worst.

 

[bob-2000]

It seems like if you say anything even vaguely offensive to anyone ever you get a warning.

 

[Azmael Silverlance]

Mr. Spinwhiz

I think there is a huge difference between 8 breakages of the rules and 8 breakages of the rules.

If someone let say over the course of 1 year makes some "LOL" posts or Firsts or something silly like this...that is not a serious reason to ban then. And it does not harm the community in no way.

Now someone being an asshole or racist or stuff like that...yes that is a good and justified reason to put the ban on a member. But if once in a long while someone goes a bit stray it shouldnt be a huge issue. You are being waaaay too strict with the rules.

Im genuinely scared to post now since both my previous warnings were really silly and from innocent mistakes X_X And how can i know if i wont make another one by accident.

 

[Qizx]

Also, I'm already on my fifth strike, despite only having one warning and one probation.

I was suspended, but it was removed so I'm assuming it was stricken from my record.

This intrigues me, did they say that they took back what they did? Or did they simply say it was over?

It wasn't the mods that suspended me, it was the appeal board. I talked to Spinwhiz, and he cleared things up for me. In the last PM he sent me, he said:

Sounds good. The suspension should have been reversed.

I took that to mean it would be taken off my record. Normally I wouldn't be bothered, but with these new rules I'm in the yellow for something that should have been a warning at worst.

Yeah I can understand why you'd wonder, I personally find that if you even have a single infraction you can never get a good behavior badge again. I know my college used to have a similar system with alcohol, but now you get your "strikes" dropped after a year or two if you aren't caught doing anything illegal again. I think that there should be something similar here like "If you go 1000 posts since getting an infraction the infraction is removed."
Just an idea.

 

[Gaiseric]

I got a low content post warning a couple months back and that little green box is going to haunt me for as long as I stay here

Kind of a bummer, even real life infractions go off your record it time.

 

[Artina89]

I think that the FHM should be depleted over time if you keep your nose clean and stay out of trouble, but other than that, I don't have any problems with the rules really. I will just keep my head down and read through what I am intending to post before I post it.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Looks like I'm going to have to start putting disclaimers at the end of all my post, because I've been put on probabtion for a couple of misinterpretations in the past, and I'll be damned if 'appealing' actually bloody did something.

(Disclaimer, no offence is intended in this post. Any offence that is incurred is purely coincidental)

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

*snipped*

Hi Spin quoting you because I think this is your domain:

This includes, but is not limited to communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give The Escapist, an individual creator, advertiser, site sponsor, product, group, government or nation a negative image. In short, if you say something you better be able to back it up with fact.

Is that bolded bit there ^^^ just standard legal-ese to disassociate The Escapist with any negativity aimed at America/American government by posters or is it an actionable offence? I infer that it's just for when people are being dicks and saying "Lol.America." to a random news post but I thought it would be prudent to check.

We can't be perverts anymore!? WHAT!? The likely hood of me getting banned in the next few days is very great now.
-image-

That was in the rules? Great, there goes half the forum.

...and the rant rule gets rid of another third


Personally even though these rules were always there unspoken having them explicitly stated intimidates me a bit.

Yup, exactly. We didn't want it to include just The Escapist or just America. Overall, we are asking people just to not say mean and slanderous things that aren't true.

As for rants, people can still let loose in a forum thread, we ask that they have a point, make sure it adds or helps discussion and that the caps and swearing are negated. Some of the best debates have a 3 paragraph "rant" but there is reason and purpose for it. Just blasting out an opinion because of hate or anger does not benefit discussion, it only stops it.

Thank you for clearing that up. I thought that would be the case but better safe then sorry and all.

Sure thing. If people have a problem, they can send in an appeal but honestly, with over 99% of the posters in this forum having less than 2 warnings ever, they just need to keep doing what they are doing because the rules haven't changed, just been updated.

Just out of curiosity but how does that number change when just active members are considered? Or people that have been active for over a year? From glancing at people's health bars from this topic I haven't seen a single person below 2 warnings. Admittedly the people I've picked haven't been chosen purely at random and this could very easily be a biased sample. It could just be that those complaining about the rules are more likely to be the one's on probation.

Also, about that 'no saying negative things about advertisers/governments/escapist etc.' rule. Where is the line drawn on this? A few days ago there was a guy talking about military advertisements being immoral, would he receive a warning? Won't this completely neuter the entire religion and politics board? They love complaining about governments and the like. Hell, are half the posters here in violation of the rules for talking negatively about the escapist's new rules?

Well, we figured most of the people who would be most vocal about the new penalty system would be the ones on the ropes with their accounts (I did say most), so that could be part of it. Part of it also could be that certain people need to appeal to get things in order.

As for the negative things, we just don't want to hear slanderous things. So, if you don't like the military, that's fine. That isn't negative, that is your opinion but you also aren't slandering the military either. If you instead state something slanderous about them killing people in Kuwait, then yes, a warning is going to come out. As this is a games site, we are going to have games advertisers that people will be talking about, much like DA2. If you don't like the game, that is fine but if you state The Escapist is getting paid for a good review, that is where we draw the line, because it isn't true.

While I don't think, nor I am suggesting that there are paid reviews on this site...

Under the rules it says that you "better have evidence" to back up claims, so I understand that we can't just go off and make stuff up, but ins't that a bit of a double standard if you don't show US evidence that there AREN'T?

(again, I am not suggesting that this is the case, just pointing out that it's a contradiction)


Anyways, I'm not sure how much I want to post here, because I can't tell what's changed or what has not other than the health bar thing.

I think it is a VERY bad idea to have all infractions a permanent thing.

Rather, not ALL should be.

If a post is outright insulting, doing something illegal, or posting obscene content, then I wouldn't mind if those do not go away.

However, low content posts and other things like that should not be a unchanging strike against someone, nor do I think it should be able to break the last straw and cause a perma ban.

Perhaps grouping the infractions in to two groups, "minor" and "major", and allowing minor ones to go away after a while.

Perhaps making minor ones not count as much as major ones, too.

From now on I fear that anytime I wish to state anything that ANYONE may find BARELY not politically correct, I will PM a mod to see if it is OK or not.

So far I have only seen around 4 posts in this thread for this new rules other than a mod saying so, so the fact that a large majority of the posters here are against it should say something.

Some of the best conversations I have had here would not be able to have anywhere else because of the sheer tolerance this community has (for the most part), I remember quite a few threads about topics such as pedophilia that were very intelligent discussions, with barely any arguments or disrespectful comments.

I fear that now one of the few places without anonymity that allows discussion of controversial content will be lost, which I think is essential, if we never talked about things deemed such, then our society would never change, be it for better or worse. The civil rights movement, for example, relied on peaceful reactions to controversial subjects.

I am seriously considering not posting again until these rules are improved or changed.

 

[mireko]

Actually, how's this for a suggestion, mods:

Have the health bar show the posts for which the user was penalized, or list the reasons for those penalties. People would learn about the rules when they inevitably check profiles to see the bar, and those of us in eternal probation will know that people won't immediately assume we're racist pedophiles from hell. Win-win.

 

[Spinwhiz]

99.9% of the forum members don't have more than 2 warnings (if I'm not mistaken, 82% don't have any infractions).

These numbers mean nothing when you consider how many people have created accounts and then never posted or posted very little.

If people can't learn how to be respectful towards others and follow very simple rules, they won't be here for long. Everyone has a bad day but even off of the internet, if you do something stupid on that bad day, you are held accountable. The same goes for The Escapist forums.

So people should be judged based on their past mistakes, not on their present ones.

Also, why are warnings held against you. That's unbelievably unfair.

Actually, those are numbers for people who post on The Escapist, in the forums, not everyone who visits or has an account.

Also, a warning is just that "stop doing this". How many times should we have to tell someone to stop doing something before they actually understand? With the new penalty system, now they understand.