ThoseDeafMutes
Member
I wouldn't be upset if that became a bannable meme.
I might even chip in to the EviLore bribery fund to make it happen.
Is GAF too strict?
- Thread starter Kraftwerk
- Start date
- Status
I wouldn't be upset if that became a bannable meme.
I might even chip in to the EviLore bribery fund to make it happen.
Trent Strong
Banned
Maybe I could have made a better comparison than that meme.
snoopeasystreet
Member
Nah, it's pretty great. Although, I wouldn't mind seeing a ban appeal subforum just for the times when I'm unsure why someone got banned.
Phat Michael
Banned
How is this post about the saudi people not bannable?
If someone posted that the people of America were a bunch of "Backward Ass Fucks!" or someone said the gay community or trans gendered's were a bunch of "Backward Ass Fucks" they would be banned INSTANTLY. But no, because its about the Middle East its completely acceptable.
The double standards here are incredible. I guess i can say what i want about muslims or arabs as long as i dont make fun of homosexuals/transgendereds/african americans etc
So if I'm South African do I get to post "black people" gifs?
Pretty sure the backwards fucks are not all Saudis. Same as when Australia gets shat on for being racist, America gets shat on for everything, and people shit on every country for something. It is not all Saudis, it is those that are backwards ass fucks that create shitty situations.
It's hard to claim of double standards when you've taken Devolution's post completely out of context. Also, try not to move the goal posts too much? Your original claim was...
... where it is clear that Devolution's original post is criticizing the government, not the race.
CrushDance
Banned
*Whistles*
Phat Michael
Banned
It's hard to claim of double standards when you've taken Devolution's post completely out of context. Also, try not to move the goal posts too much? Your original claim was
Where it is clear that Devolution's original post is criticizing the government, not the race.
Backward ass fucks is actually worse than "bunch of fucks" - how is it out of context at all? she said it and its fine because its only about saudi's. How is it clear her post is referencing the government? Did she mention the government - i quoted her post verbatim so how is that out of context?
Defend her all you want but that sort of post should not be tolerated and if anyone else said something remotely similar about another race/group they would be banned and you know it.
If i went into the Warchowski thread right now about Lana Warchowski and wrote "backward ass fuck" in there id get banned. Hell, a guy got banned in that thread for simply posting the world "gross" . If you cant see a double standard there then there is something wrong with you.
old manatee
Banned
I got banned before. There was a thread on ps3 skyrim being buggy and I said something like "a buggy bethesda game isn't news". I'm kind of a martyr.
davidsaurus
Member
C word isn't that offensive from where I am from, no moreso than the others. I let it slip occasionally.
i got banned once. it really surprised me, so much so that i took it upon myself to address my attitude. i was arrogant, self absorbed, sarcastic. i now live by this phrase: don't do unto others what you don't others do unto you.
so basically, i review what i'm about to say or do and make sure it doesn't offend others, poke fun or bully. i've noticed that people notice me more when i'm warmer toward them, like people in shops and stuff. i make polite conversations, commenting on weather, ask how they're are doing, etc. try to brighten up other peoples day.
so basically, i review what i'm about to say or do and make sure it doesn't offend others, poke fun or bully. i've noticed that people notice me more when i'm warmer toward them, like people in shops and stuff. i make polite conversations, commenting on weather, ask how they're are doing, etc. try to brighten up other peoples day.
See Dead Man's post, and I have no reason to defend Devolution. I hardly even know her outside of the posts I've read.
Her language may be strong, and that may get her in trouble (and she has been temp banned before if my memory serves me right) but you're still looking for a double standard there intentionally.
I won't even comment on your last point, as I don't wish to put words in the mouth of the staff or moderation team.
Well you do not have to be a complete jerk about it. Everything was really civil before this post!!
Roland Garros
Banned
That is utterly ridiculous if accurate. Who could possibly justify that?
Castor Krieg
Banned
Which one of conditions you mentioned I caused by my deliberate lifestyle?
Of course they are unpredictable. A dozen mods are going to have different thresholds of tolerance, and one will be offended by something another may find completely innocent.
But yeah, I hate "Who?" type responses.
One of my favourite places on the Internet, a great deal of that has to do with the fact that it is properly moderated. However, yes, sometimes it can be far too strict, specially when dealing with political correction (and no, it has little to nothing to do with tolerance), and I must admit that when there are mods in a debate I tend to feel a bit tad afraid of defending a different position than theirs.
Don't get me wrong, It is great to see mods engaged in debates and discussions as a part of the community, but their position of power tends to create a "spiral of silence" on certain issues, specially if they are passionate about it - just look that when someone is un - modded there's usually a lot of relieved posters and comments of "whew, at last I cant talk X and Y without fear from said moderator" (the Amix0r de-modding comes to mind, and he is a guy whose positions I tend to agree with).
Another thing that contributes to the perception of "strictness" is the fact that once someone is banned there's no way to know if it is a permaban or not, and that some decisions regarding the closure of treads are usually not explained to the public - you just see a closed tread with lots of banned people and assume the worst, but the bannings can be temporal and the closure completely justified (as it usually is).
Other than that, this is a pretty great place to debate, and the "zero tolerance with idiocy" policy is necessary in order to ensue a good discussion, even if gaf is, afterall, ruled by humans and as such, has its flaws.
Don't get me wrong, It is great to see mods engaged in debates and discussions as a part of the community, but their position of power tends to create a "spiral of silence" on certain issues, specially if they are passionate about it - just look that when someone is un - modded there's usually a lot of relieved posters and comments of "whew, at last I cant talk X and Y without fear from said moderator" (the Amix0r de-modding comes to mind, and he is a guy whose positions I tend to agree with).
Another thing that contributes to the perception of "strictness" is the fact that once someone is banned there's no way to know if it is a permaban or not, and that some decisions regarding the closure of treads are usually not explained to the public - you just see a closed tread with lots of banned people and assume the worst, but the bannings can be temporal and the closure completely justified (as it usually is).
Other than that, this is a pretty great place to debate, and the "zero tolerance with idiocy" policy is necessary in order to ensue a good discussion, even if gaf is, afterall, ruled by humans and as such, has its flaws.
Gaf is fine for the most part. They let more system wars stuff and misinformation about PC gaming go on than I'm happy with, and on OT they're probably TOO strict with all of these new word bans for the oversensitive crowd. But for most normal day to day use I am comfortable with how Gaf operates.
Lovely Salsa
Banned
I got banned for 2 weeks because I said Jade Raymond looks like my cousin and posted picture when someone requested it. Instead of just editing the post and give me a warning, the mod thought it would be better just to ban me and do nothing....
I think some mods like to abuse their power
I think some mods like to abuse their power
I love GAF and my bans have been justified for the most part.
Politics and beliefs seep into any place, GAF is no different. Bullying is acceptable on GAF, as long as it's within the "belief system" (LOL) of the hive mind. But if someone is bullied for something that the Hive stands against, it's an issue.
The lack of consistency in punishment here is sad at times.
Politics and beliefs seep into any place, GAF is no different. Bullying is acceptable on GAF, as long as it's within the "belief system" (LOL) of the hive mind. But if someone is bullied for something that the Hive stands against, it's an issue.
The lack of consistency in punishment here is sad at times.
ot:
no way. Gaf is a site with one of the more lax moderation touches, which is largely to do in part with how big the community is as well as how it's so loosely structured. People only get bent out of shape when they cross a line and they think the punishment is too severe.
for example junior members like myself are generally prone to being banned for crossing certain lines mostly on the basis that we won't be good for the long term health of the community (which is one of the benefits of having floodgates on new users since since it weeds out the people who are really problematic overall). But people who get perma'd on junior accounts tend to make big stinks about it on other sites which feeds into this notion that Gaf is hyper strict.
no way. Gaf is a site with one of the more lax moderation touches, which is largely to do in part with how big the community is as well as how it's so loosely structured. People only get bent out of shape when they cross a line and they think the punishment is too severe.
for example junior members like myself are generally prone to being banned for crossing certain lines mostly on the basis that we won't be good for the long term health of the community (which is one of the benefits of having floodgates on new users since since it weeds out the people who are really problematic overall). But people who get perma'd on junior accounts tend to make big stinks about it on other sites which feeds into this notion that Gaf is hyper strict.
That is irrelevant. The point is that you will need the healthcare system just as much as an obese person, and maybe more over your lifetime if you lifespan is long. So making cost your complaint is stupid.
How many black comedians make jokes about white people? How many white comedians make jokes about black people?
Gaming side? Maybe a little bit, but for gerneally understandable reasons. OT? Not at all.
There will always be bans and permas that feel unjust, and some might actually be, but overall the real idiots weed themselves out sooner or later, making a better GAF in the long run.
There will always be bans and permas that feel unjust, and some might actually be, but overall the real idiots weed themselves out sooner or later, making a better GAF in the long run.
I got a short ban for saying that the MS e3 conference gave me cancer.
In retrospect I feel like I deserved it because it was neither funny nor clever and in the end it was distasteful. I don't think GAF is too strict but going through this thread there seem to be historic examples of highly questionable bans.
In retrospect I feel like I deserved it because it was neither funny nor clever and in the end it was distasteful. I don't think GAF is too strict but going through this thread there seem to be historic examples of highly questionable bans.
Sye d'Burns
Member
Pretty much all of the bigger names. Don Rickles.
Seems like a pretty fair fight to me.
Link me some skits of anyone but Rickles, who is famous for making fun of everyone, that centers around making fun, in depth of the black community. I can't think of anyone who has that as a major focus of their stand-up.
Sye d'Burns
Member
Whoa there. There's a big difference between making jokes and being the major focus of your act. I never made such a claim so I'm not about to try refuting it.
edit: Rereading it, it seems as though you may gave misunderstood what I originally said.
1) Pretty much all of the bigger names. 2) Don Rickles.
These were two different sentences responding to two separate questions.
1) How many black comedians make jokes about white people? 2) How many white comedians make jokes about black people?
Castor Krieg
Banned
It is extremely relevant. But I do not want to continue this, we ventured off-topic long enough.
Canis lupus
Member
" Do you agree with this? From the long waiting-list to get in, to the taboo subjects that is not taboo on nearly all other forums. "
I'm somehow new, what are these taboo subjects?
I'm somehow new, what are these taboo subjects?
It's not strict, just overly sensitive. You can't say anything that deviates from the gaf standard mindset (aka the bullshit image many posters project of being perfect uber tolerant human beings who have never made a mistake or said something offensive) without people getting hysterical.
Moral Panic
Member
Too lax in some areas, too harsh in others. Legitimate opinion doesn't need to be stifled and someone should never be banned for answering a question, even if that answer is extremely distasteful. FFS someone got banned (don't know if it was overturned) for calling out the "woman can't grip" comment in a joke.
At the same time, certain personal attacks and comments which add absolutely nothing to a conversation are left unchecked. GAF, compared to other heavily moderated boards like Cracked, allows personal life story posts. In some of those it seems to be perfectly fine to use the person's story as a rod to beat them with, rather than giving legitimate advice. The "defense force" comments are completely unnecessary too, but those go unmoderated too.
The "cunt" and "bitch" thing catches people completely unaware and if you didn't read GAF everyday you'd have no idea that such things were not allowed. Especially since bitch is said in prime-time TV, and is pretty much not viewed as a swear word any more. It needs to be clearer.
At the same time, certain personal attacks and comments which add absolutely nothing to a conversation are left unchecked. GAF, compared to other heavily moderated boards like Cracked, allows personal life story posts. In some of those it seems to be perfectly fine to use the person's story as a rod to beat them with, rather than giving legitimate advice. The "defense force" comments are completely unnecessary too, but those go unmoderated too.
The "cunt" and "bitch" thing catches people completely unaware and if you didn't read GAF everyday you'd have no idea that such things were not allowed. Especially since bitch is said in prime-time TV, and is pretty much not viewed as a swear word any more. It needs to be clearer.
PetriP-TNT
Member
I don't think GAF is too strick, but in the few years the forum has become much more tame and in return more boring at parts. No more crazy OT threads or if there are they are quickly locked. But as a gaming forum it's still top notch as far as community goes.
Not strict but sensitive is a good way to put it. As I was saying before, where there should be some kind of quality control to prevent one word crap posts and other low quality posts, there isn't. Where there shouldn't be control such as for profanity and legitimate opinions, there is.
Is there anyone that thinks this forum wouldn't benefit by implementing a rule like this? (From the SomethingAwful forums)
Over there if you just make a post saying you agree or disagree, or simply saying "No" or "Yes", or "Jesus", or respond to a post with a gif file, or say "This game is better than that game", you're typically instantly punished for it. Most threads here really don't need to be as long as they are. There needs to be a Quality-filter not a naughty words filter.
Is there anyone that thinks this forum wouldn't benefit by implementing a rule like this? (From the SomethingAwful forums)
Over there if you just make a post saying you agree or disagree, or simply saying "No" or "Yes", or "Jesus", or respond to a post with a gif file, or say "This game is better than that game", you're typically instantly punished for it. Most threads here really don't need to be as long as they are. There needs to be a Quality-filter not a naughty words filter.
Alligatorjandro
Banned
maybe
Yes, certainly and obviously. I would not change necessarilly the restrictions that have to do with letting people in but moderation on taboo subjects needs to be less strict and conformist and moderate unpopular opinions less.
However I certainly agree with plenty of moderation that does happen but there is the questionable aspect of it as well in these forums that harms discussions.
However I certainly agree with plenty of moderation that does happen but there is the questionable aspect of it as well in these forums that harms discussions.
butter_stick
Banned
Being strict is GAF's gimmick. Everyone circle jerks to the prospect of someone getting banned. People get off on people daring to post something they know will get them banned.
Just look how Bish is basically a meme because he bans people harshly. Same as old Dragona and Amir0x, GAF exists for it's users to jerk off on meta drama.
Just look how Bish is basically a meme because he bans people harshly. Same as old Dragona and Amir0x, GAF exists for it's users to jerk off on meta drama.
blame space
Banned
no it has to operate like it does because it's huge and a lotta people are dumb
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
The only thing I wish changed was the reason someone got banned being put in the post that banned them or their last post or whatever. I hate seeing someone get banned and not having any idea why even after I peruse all of their recent posts. I realize all the mods have a place to go to see ban reasons but members seeing something similar might deter them from repeating the offense. I'm sure a fair amount of posters here have never read the "rules" or have no idea that posting "tldr" or "who gives a shit" is worthy of a ban.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
They are not.
Like 90% of the things that will get you banned aren't written anywhere.
It's bullshit.
StriKeVillain
Banned
I don't think so, it's definitely ambiguous in some areas, but it's certainly not "too strict".
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
We Americans are sensitive to anything not involving guns or violence. If you photoshop a rifle on that naked lady picture (or her head exploding) I'm sure there won't be any issue.
- Status