Important Civility Rules Enforcement

[Deleted member 1]

“Jokes are okay, but not the ones I don’t like” is the biggest red flag of all red flags. I hate that policy with a burning passion, and it’s already on full display against something fully innocent.

Of course we'll review it under appeal if he chooses to appeal the threadban, but it was intentional edgeplay around the rules, and rules which are selectively enforced, inevitably stop being enforced entirely, being held in contempt by all.

 

[FriedCFour]

*bangs head on desk* He made a joke that was in violation of rule 2e, that is the sole reason he got thread banned.

Not forum banned, not sub forum banned, thread banned.

yes.“Jokes are okay, except for ones by people I don’t like and ones not within my ‘tastes’.” Thanks for agreeing with me, and I salute you for your brave fight in the Wolf Packs. Thank you for your service.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

This too. I get that it was a joke: I found it personally distasteful and disagree with it, but I understood it was a joke. His point was made when he got threadbanned for it.

That was what did it for me. They straight up proved Sane's point then and there for the entire site to see. Have we men of the Right/people who can take a fucking joke got somewhere to reconvene, as I rather enjoy talking to you chaps. I'm already lamenting the loss of Certified and I didn't agree with them on a lot of things.

Again, I can't help but be reminded of Kotaku In Action during its waning days and KIA2 breaking off. It was similar behaviour that set that mess off. All so stupidly avoidable...

 

[Spartan303]

As I said, I don't disagree with the intentions behind this... but it's all about perception from the users. On that front, ya'll stepped in a shit sandwich, especially given our origin story (fuck, I sound like a comic book, heh) had this as a key element... yeah.

Then you'd think they'd give me a little more trust as I was and still am the main one who gets ire for the PM. Please explain to me how a Staff enforcing its rules is suddenly a case for concern? Because this was more us admitting our failure and saying we are enforcing the rules we said we would. Or are you worried about 'selective' enforcement? Is that the gist of the counter argument you are making?

 

[Jormungandr]

Then you'd think they'd give me a little more trust as I was and still am the main one who gets ire for the PM. Please explain to me how a Staff enforcing its rules is suddenly a case for concern? Because this was more us admitting our failure and saying we are enforcing the rules we said we would. Or are you worried about 'selective' enforcement? Is that the gist of the counter argument you are making?

I guess it's partly fear about history repeating itself, even by the smallest steps and despite the current situation, and selective enforcement. Irrational or not (and I do trust you and other staff members), remember it's about perception. We're hypersensitive to this sort of shit for a reason, mind. But, part of that fear has been validated somewhat in this thread already by a joke designed to prove a point... proving the point. So... yeah.

 

[Deleted member 1]

I guess it's partly fear about history repeating itself, even by the smallest steps and despite the current situation, and selective enforcement. Irrational or not (and I do trust you and other staff members), remember it's about perception. But, part of that fear has been validated somewhat in this thread already by a joke designed to prove a point... proving the point. So... yeah.

The problem with jokes "designed to prove points" is that they force a reaction. If you're going to apply the rules fairly, you have to apply the rules fairly. You're asking us to make an exception to the rules because "everyone" knew it was a joke.

We've chosen to apply the rules fairly.

Let me promise you, this is the MUCH wiser course of action for the future, especially should some large number of leftists arrive.

 

[Jormungandr]

The problem with jokes "designed to prove points" is that they force a reaction. If you're going to apply the rules fairly, you have to apply the rules fairly. You're asking us to make an exception to the rules because "everyone" knew it was a joke.

We've chosen to apply the rules fairly.

Let me promise you, this is the MUCH wiser course of action for the future, especially should some large number of leftists arrive.

Yes, technically it was a rules violation. In this case, he posted it for a specific reason/context though, suspecting what would happen that did end up happening. His point was proven, and a precedent (or the perception of one) set.

 

[Deleted member 1]

Yes, technically it was a rules violation. In this case, he posted it for a specific reason/context though, suspecting what would happen that did end up happening. His point was proven, and a precedent (or the perception of one) set.

The precedent that we enforce the rules fairly?

 

[FriedCFour]

The precedent that we enforce the rules fairly?

That you would massively overreact to a joke that bothered absolutely no one but one moderator with bad blood with the guy who made it.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

Let me promise you, this is the MUCH wiser course of action for the future, especially should some large number of leftists arrive.

...that is the absolute last thing we want. And you are deeply mistaken if you think any of this nonsense will appease them.

 

[Deleted member 1]

...that is the absolute last thing we want. And you are deeply mistaken if you think any of this nonsense will appease them.

What I mean is that the rules being applied impartially will let me (to paraphrase a particularly bloodthirsty Carlist song I am extremely fond of) ban more of them than there are flowers in April and May.

 

[Spartan303]

I guess it's partly fear about history repeating itself, even by the smallest steps and despite the current situation, and selective enforcement. Irrational or not (and I do trust you and other staff members), remember it's about perception. But, part of that fear has been validated somewhat in this thread already by a joke designed to prove a point... proving the point. So... yeah.

Its irrational. We have no intention of repeating the mistakes of what happened before. I would say we were actually too hesitant to hit for what few things we did catch. As for how we handle each violation as it arises it depends. So far, for the most part, most things like would get a Moderator message or a temporary thread ban. Rarely have things had to escalate to higher. I've actually never given out points since I've been here. Infact today I think was the first time I've seen points given. Temporary threadbans certainly. Subforum bans on those rare occasions someone didnt get the message. That trend is likely to continue. Because as the end of the day we are much more lax than other forums.

 

[Jormungandr]

...that is the absolute last thing we want. And you are deeply mistaken if you think any of this nonsense will appease them.

Remember, being on the Left doesn't mean you're a Leftard. Unfortunately, most people on the Left these days are Leftards, so I presume when you think Left you think Leftard...?

 

[Laskar]

Civility seems like the camels nose of SJW convergence. It's always " can we have a little civility" at first, with the meaning of this civility always being stretched further and further in a leftward direction.

If you think the situations are at all similar, then you do not understand how SJWs use civility as a weapon. When normal people ask for civility, they are asking for baseline rules of politeness to be observed, akin to wiping your boots before you walk into the house.

When Leftists ask for civility, they're not asking for civility at all. They are asking for speech codes that will be applied in only one direction, so that 'privileged' people must walk on eggshells, but 'oppressed' people can sling out slander and slurs with no regard for the rules. The civility that leftists call for is based on the premise that even ideas discussed in a neutral, clinical manner can cause permanent harm to protected classes, but other classes of people deserve that harm. The ultimate goal is to shift the Overton window until only Leftist ideas can be discussed in public.

If you're worried that a required level of civility is just creeping Leftism, you've got it backwards. You have mistaken the tail for the teeth. Zoe is many things, but not a Leftist. None of the mod staff subscribes to or has any love for critical theory. They are not going to use that baseline level of civility to force compliance with a rigid ideology.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

Remember, being on the Left doesn't mean you're a Leftard. Unfortunately, most people on the Left these days are Leftards, so I presume when you think Left you think Leftard...?

Pretty damn much, although Zoe did point it out as a method of curbing their multiplication rate so there is that to it (not entirely sure how thread banning poor old Sane over a fucking joke contributes to that but oh well). To be of the left means embracing the hubris that you can micromanage a perfect society in some shape or form. That worldview has brought nothing but death down the years.

 

[Duke Nukem]

Remember, being on the Left doesn't mean you're a Leftard. Unfortunately, most people on the Left these days are Leftards, so I presume when you think Left you think Leftard...?

I don't think i have ever met a reasonable left winger .

 

[Deleted member 1]

Pretty damn much, although Zoe did point it out as a method of curbing their multiplication rate so there is that to it (not entirely sure how thread banning poor old Sane over a fucking joke contributes to that but oh well). To be of the left means embracing the hubris that you can micromanage a perfect society in some shape or form. That worldview has brought nothing but death down the years.

If people come in here and accuse our members of being Nazis, they're going to get infracted. Period.

That's why we have no sense of humour about the topic.

 

[Harlock]

Sane was bait, he dangled his toe in a shark tank and it got bitten off.
The lesson to learn there is not be surprised when a shark bites you, it is to not stick your appendages in a shark tank and start wiggling them.

 

[TyrantTriumphant]

I think that people who are worried that the site might get totalitarian in the future should just take a wait and see approach.

If things get bad then they can leave, if things are still fine then they can stay.

It's not like the mods are coming up with new rules. They're just enforcing rules that are already there.

 

[Deleted member 1]

The bottom line is that I am not going to apologise when my staff applies a rule impartially. I consider that a virtue that bodes well for the future.