Support NeoGAF

[Mr. Enigma]

I was banned for six months because I innocently wondered in the November 2009 NPD thread how many Xbox 360 console sales were from people who got their consoles banned in the big sweep they did the week before Modern Warfare 2 came out. It was fanboyish in no way and was just a one sentence question with no foul language.

At some point, a mod posted in the incredibly fast-moving thread that anyone who made any references like that would be banned and sounded rather power-trippy. The OP was not updated with that warning.

So yeah, I got banned for six months for percieved PS3 fanboyism, which was funny because I didn't even own a PS3 at the time. The ban message left for me was pretty nasty too. I don't even remember the mod who did it. I never saw them before that and haven't seen them since.

I thought that was totally ridiculous and almost didn't come back. But I've had no issues since then. I think this place polices itself very well and often isn't unreasonable.

 

[AnathemicOne]

When did this thread become a discussion of obesity?

 

[aznpxdd]

In some cases, yeah. Some communities gets the shit end of the stick.

I do wish the weed thread is still open though.

 

[C4Lukins]

When did this thread become a discussion of obesity?

I think it was an example that went all to hell.

 

[Gustav]

I do not know if Gabe has a medical condition or not, however what is most likely: a. that each obese person is too lazy to watch their diet? b. that each obese person has a medical condition, which would mean like 40% of American adults have that?

As for priorities - IN MY OPINION I would rank not having joint paints, walking more than 10 meters without losing your breath, etc. pretty high up if you care about the quality of your life at all.

Yes. And in Gabes opinion his highest priority is to make money off of NeoGAF users like you. See how this works? How you prioritize in life is nobody's business but your own.

 

[Arjen]

Yes, on certain subjects.
The fact that drug discussion got banned and the restriction on adult content/discussion are good examples.

Yeah kind of weird that the Weed OT was closed, but the owner had a massive post where he describes a tale of insane irresponsible drug use.

 

[THRILLH0]

I was serious for the most part. My point was that if you have a problem with a post too many people assume that the mods are deliberately ignoring something rather than not seeing it because they're not reading that particular topic. I think you'll find that most of the mods are dedicated to the gaming side so they're not reading OT. And yet a ton of the problematic posting is DONE on the OT.

This is bullshit when it comes to Christianity. Mods actively post in threads where child rapist priest jokes and demeaning unicorn analogies are drawn. Not only don't they do a fucking thing but some mods have literally sanctioned it in said threads.

Please don't pretend that moderation in regards to Christianity is something that it's not.

 

[V_Arnold]

Gaf is sensible. There are few places left to be sensible on the Internet with so many people posting.

In any other forum, if you become a long-term user, you can deviate and finally express yourself as an asshole you truly are. Because honestly, we ALL can be assholes for one or two things (or for a small amount of period) in our lives. And if we are allowed to freely express that in a place this large, just because X or Y user has been here for a few years now, and he is "a veteran now", well...chaos time.

Everywhere, but here. Here, every time I see some well-known gaffer banned for a week or two because he/she forgot that it is Neogaf, not the local pub, I got reminded of this. And it is great this way.

AShep: I follow religious debates closely on the OT section, but I have yet to see abuse jokes being thrown around as accusations. Purple unicorns and other arguments, yep, but those can be dealt with.

 

[Acerac]

Yeah kind of weird that the Weed OT was closed, but the owner had a massive post where he describes a tale of insane irresponsible drug use.

You find it surprising that the owner of GAF can do whatever he wants on the forum?

 

[sp3000]

The forum has basically become the modern NFL. Questionable bans, weird double standards, too much political correctness, etc.. It's a completely different forum from what I entered in 2003.

I prefer moderation that makes sure debate doesn't veer into questionable territory (insults, personal attacks, etc). Mods swooping in and banning people who have differing opinions from the general GAF zeitgeist is troubling. I don't agree with banning people because they don't support gay marriage; and no, I would not advocate banning someone who argued against interracial marriage either. If the person is not causing trouble or making personal insults/attacks, what does it matter.

Nor do I like the general hive mind that sets in. Whether it's the liberal bias (disclaimer: I am a liberal) in political threads or the inability to have an intelligent conversation on the gaming forum if you offer an opinion that goes against the grain. People get ganged up on, accused of trolling, etc

This is pretty much why I don't post at all in OT. I only visit the gaming side for news and I stay out of controversial threads if I have a opinion different than the majority.

As has been stated, a dissenting opinion is usually stamped out pretty fast on this forum. Not always through an outright ban, but rather that posters arguing against the dissenter will have much more freedom in what they can say.

Moderators seem to have trouble separating dissenting opinions about controversial subjects from political correctness, and I find as a result it's not worth posting in those threads unless you agree with what everyone else is saying.

 

[Phat Michael]

No, i'd say the strictness is just right.

The zero tolerance on hate ,racism, discrimination, general bullshit etc is pretty fucking awesome. Besides, a ban is more or less the equivalent of an infraction on gaf (2 weeks isn't that long).

this is not true at all. there is zero.tolerance on racism only if you mention african americans

in this forum you can say what u want about.any arabs or belittle islam and thats ok. if u make one gay joke u are banned

 

[Sye d'Burns]

Yes. And in Gabes opinion his highest priority is to make money off of NeoGAF users like you. See how this works? How you prioritize in life is nobody's business but your own.

But see, his tax dollars finance his fellow citizens' dietary repercussions. I've heard that argument used many times in Obamacare threads and it's not without its element of truth.

Still, I think it's wrong to lump every fat person into the "lacks self-control" category, which is how it almost inevitably ends up in threads.

this is not true at all. there is zero.tolerance on racism only if you mention african americans

in this forum you can say what u want about.any arabs or belittle islam and thats ok. if u make one gay joke u are banned

"White People Problems." Is it racist?

 

[Gustav]

Other thing I find is handled a little bit too lax is the frequent use of "white straight male" as something negative or to discredit people's opinions. This is borderline sexist/racist and shouldn't be an argument for/against anything.

But see, his tax dollars finance his fellow citizens' dietary repercussions. I've heard that argument used many times in Obamacare threads and it's not without its element of truth.

Still, I think it's wrong to lump every fat person into the "lacks self-control" category, which is how it almost inevitably ends up in threads.

Man, your avatar is just perfect alongside this sentence.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

yes, I do believe things are taken too serious. it feels at times like people are "walking" on eggshells. sometimes it feels as if there is a certain level of hypocrisy depending on the mod (a Latino culture thread was started a couple of years ago and all was fine for a while then other types started popping up and as a result all including the Latino were locked). now I see only the black thread was kept open which I felt was unfair but that's the way it goes and it's not my forum. *shrug*

 

[Veezy]

I agree with that, I am simply against a knee-jerk reaction that assumes everyone that is fat is fat because of some severe health condition which makes them unable to monitor their weight. With that assumption it is impossible to discuss other important topics e.g. ow to make people to exercise more, how should society tackle growing obesity problem, etc.



This is the stance that I am against a few lines above. Yes, I believe most people are fat because they are lazy, do not watch their calorie intake and do not want to exercise. It is ridiculously easy to exercise - you can do it even at 10-11pm. Moreover, recent research shows growing obesity problem is a result of increased calorie intake, and not lack of physical exercise. Check that - you do not even need to exercise to be fit, just stop eating that fat!

I would agree calling fat people lazy is not politically correct, but not ignorant.

As a trainer, I can tell you that you're a bit ignorant.

While the mechanics of weight loss are simple, life is not. You know what income group has the highest risk of obesity? The poor. You know who's more likely to work multiple jobs? The poor. You know who probably doesn't have the money to buy proper food, gym membership, and the time to engage in a healthy active lifestyle? The poor. You know who's not lazy? People working two jobs. Yes, this isn't true for everybody, but it is for a lot. Economic downturn, and all that.

In addition, the American government has for several decades pushed a pretty bad diet set up (seven servings of grain a day and half of that in protein, are fucking kidding me), has subsided corn leading to an increase of poor quality food being sold at generally cheaper prices compared to higher quality food, and proper nutrition and activity habits are no set up during the developmental years.

Finally, and most damningly, television and media in general has set up unrealistic expectations on both body type and amount of work/time it takes to get in shape when over weight. Combined with the shear amount of misinformation out there (lookin at you Men's and Women's Heath magazine), the criminalizing of steroids, and zero regulation over the billion dollar supplement industry (you can literally falsely advertise), you have a perfect shit storm that is leading America into not only being the most obese country in the world, but also one of the most expensive to keep healthy.


On topic, generally speaking, I've not ran into situations where I've seen somebody banned for stating their opinion. Plenty of people have gone back and forth with moderators and haven't gotten banned. Don't be a dick and you should be fine.

 

[Sophia]

this is not true at all. there is zero.tolerance on racism only if you mention african americans

in this forum you can say what u want about.any arabs or belittle islam and thats ok. if u make one gay joke u are banned

Context is everything when it comes to moderation. =p

 

[Hindle]

In terms of swearing yea I'd say it is.

 

[Phat Michael]

Context is everything when it comes to moderation. =p

people calling all saudi arabians a "bunch of fucks" or making snide remarks about "islam being the religion of peace..ROFL". in what context is that acceptable to you? people also saying about the middle east "i wouldnt want to live in that shithole"

how are these not bannable?

 

[Sye d'Burns]

Man, your avatar is just perfect alongside this sentence.

Yes, it is. I was trying to be as tactful in phrasing his argument as I could without self-avatar posting. I see I hit close to the mark.

 

[Sophia]

people calling all saudi arabians a "bunch of fucks" or making snide remarks about "islam being the religion of peace..ROFL". in what context is that acceptable to you? people also saying about the middle east "i wouldnt want to live in that shithole"

how are these not bannable?

You're asking me questions while referring to posts that I have never seen and never will see without your assistance. Perhaps the moderation team missed over it? Or maybe perhaps everyone involved did see a temp ban and it's now over?

 

[SeriousApes]

All I know is, generally, there seem to be less annoying people here than on other forums I've been to

Spoiler

Gamefaqs

. If it's due to GAF's strict policies, then that's alright with me.

 

[Dead Man]

So just allow them to be fat, even if it indirectly effects me? Or are you simply so short-sighted that you cannot think of why that would be a problem? I understand that in US you pay your own medical bills, however here in Germany my medical coverage will be used to treat heart condition of an obese person.



"I hate niggers" has no reasonable explanation. Second of all, GAF is an Internet forum, and you should treat it as such, stop being so invested into chatting with strangers online. Lastly, your stance is exactly what I find strange - I should be able to voice my opinion on your opinion. Otherwise it is not really a discussion board, instead everyone is talking to themselves.

When you get old and get cancer, or heart disease, or dementia, or severe arthritis, or break your hip and can't walk, or go blind, or have kidney failure, or lose your hearing, what do you think will be paying for your medical coverage?

 

[Roland Garros]

Agreed. There are childish pranks amongst friends, and there is being a morally reprehensible scumbag.

Punching the kid and breaking his jaw while the poor bastard pleaded... That was the bit that got me.

Ugh.

 

[Veezy]

When you get old and get cancer, or heart disease, or dementia, or severe arthritis, or break your hip and can't walk, or go blind, or have kidney failure, or lose your hearing, what do you think will be paying for your medical coverage?

But you don't choose to get old and get cancer, that kinda just happens.

In the States we did it to ourselves. The cheapest food out there is also the least healthy thanks to corn subsidies. With the downturn in the economy and the loss of jobs, more and more people are getting their daily meals from fast food locations. So, we're giving tax money to one group in order to pay more private and public money later on our health.

When you see a 14 year old kid with early onset diabetes because he eats terrible crap every day, it really sets into place how wrong we are on diet/exercise here.

 

[Ryaaan14]

I've gotten a 2 week ban for arguing that the word bitch is a cross-gender slur, yet people use negroidal as a meme and get away scot-free. So I'd say NeoGAF isn't as strict as it is confused as fuck.

 

[Kong Fisso]

I got banned for some bullshit. Some genius mod with lacking comprehension skills chose to find it offensive (better be safe than sorry) and banned me. Like it was my problem that he/she couldn't read properly. But I guess a month without GAF did me some good.

 

[Dead Man]

But you don't choose to get old and get cancer, that kinda just happens.

In the States we did it to ourselves. The cheapest food out there is also the least healthy thanks to corn subsidies. With the downturn in the economy and the loss of jobs, more and more people are getting their daily meals from fast food locations. So, we're giving tax money to one group in order to pay more private and public money later on our health.

When you see a 14 year old kid with early onset diabetes because he eats terrible crap every day, it really sets into place how wrong we are on diet/exercise here.

The point is, everyone needs health care if they live long enough. There is no getting around it.

Edit:
http://businesspublicpolicy.com/?p=353

So, eliminating obesity reduces average health expenditure by $1429 per year but adds about $40,000 in health expenditure at the end of life.

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029

With a simulation model, lifetime health-care costs were estimated for a cohort of obese people aged 20 y at baseline. To assess the impact of obesity, comparisons were made with similar cohorts of smokers and “healthy-living” persons (defined as nonsmokers with a body mass index between 18.5 and 25). Except for relative risk values, all input parameters of the simulation model were based on data from The Netherlands. In sensitivity analyses the effects of epidemiologic parameters and cost definitions were assessed. Until age 56 y, annual health expenditure was highest for obese people. At older ages, smokers incurred higher costs. Because of differences in life expectancy, however, lifetime health expenditure was highest among healthy-living people and lowest for smokers. Obese individuals held an intermediate position. Alternative values of epidemiologic parameters and cost definitions did not alter these conclusions.

 

[Sye d'Burns]

I've gotten a 2 week ban for arguing that the word bitch is a cross-gender slur, yet people use negroidal as a meme and get away scot-free. So I'd say NeoGAF isn't as strict as it is confused as fuck.

I've never once seen this.

I got banned for some bullshit. Some genius mod with lacking comprehension skills chose to find it offensive (better be safe than sorry) and banned me. Like it was my problem that he/she couldn't read properly. But I guess a month without GAF did me some good.

I guess we're just supposed to take your word for it?

 

[Veezy]

The point is, everyone needs health care if they live long enough. There is no getting around it.

Edit:
http://businesspublicpolicy.com/?p=353


http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029

Oh, forgive me, I completely agree.

 

[Tookay]

While generally I think the moderating team is pretty respectable and acquit themselves well, I think the uneasy distinction between what's a choice and what's innate has led to some problematic decision-making on moderating policy.

It seems that things that are a part of a person's genetic makeup or what they feel they were "born with" (race, sex, gender identity, sexuality, weight) are always vigorously protected, but other aspects (religion, political orientation) are much fairer game to criticize, caricature, or "hivemind troll." And while this makes some sense, it's coming from a sort of liberal viewpoint that recognizes that these secondary identities are somewhat lesser and not as "inherent" as the others (and therefore fair game to criticize), when some religious people would argue that they've been "born with it" in the same sense a transgender person may feel they were "born with it."

 

[V_Arnold]

"So, eliminating obesity reduces average health expenditure by $1429 per year but adds about $40,000 in health expenditure at the end of life."

Oh wow... this has got to be the biggest joke ever. Let us compare 40k "at the end of life" with a few decades of LIFE where you actually feel good about your body! Let us compare it...oh wait. You cant. One cant put a price tag on "feeling good, every day".

 

[Dead Man]

"So, eliminating obesity reduces average health expenditure by $1429 per year but adds about $40,000 in health expenditure at the end of life."

Oh wow... this has got to be the biggest joke ever. Let us compare 40k "at the end of life" with a few decades of LIFE where you actually feel good about your body! Let us compare it...oh wait. You cant. One cant put a price tag on "feeling good, every day".

At no point did I or anyone else suggest that. Of course good health is to be desired. But whining about the costs of obesity on healthcare is misguided.

Oh, forgive me, I completely agree.

No worries, I was really replying to a few people, I just quoted you, sorry to be unclear.

 

[Ryaaan14]

I've never once seen this.

Negroidal Street Magic

There's nothing negroidal about this.

Ok that might be a little negroidal.

.

 

[Gustav]

"So, eliminating obesity reduces average health expenditure by $1429 per year but adds about $40,000 in health expenditure at the end of life."

Oh wow... this has got to be the biggest joke ever. Let us compare 40k "at the end of life" with a few decades of LIFE where you actually feel good about your body! Let us compare it...oh wait. You cant. One cant put a price tag on "feeling good, every day".

This shit makes me downright sad.

 

[Kong Fisso]

I've never once seen this.




I guess we're just supposed to take your word for it?

I found it pathethic to fuck an ugly gold digger.
Well, I find it pathetic to fuck any gold digger, just more so if she/he's ugly. Didn't know that I wasn't allowed to hold that opinion.

 

[Sye d'Burns]

.

I have now. Yeesh.

I found it pathethic to fuck an ugly gold digger.
Well, I find it pathetic to fuck any gold digger, just more so if she/he's ugly. Didn't know that I wasn't allowed to hold that opinion.

But you're the Count... ah ah ah... You can't empathizzle with someone wanting to count the contents of your wallet? That's harsh man. The Count's against counting if she ain't doing it for him.

 

[ColtraineGF]

Yes, on certain subjects.
The fact that drug discussion got banned and the restriction on adult content/discussion are good examples.

Well, to be fair, these two in particular were due to Google's policies more than NeoGAF's. There was an official post way back explaining why it happened.

 

[Milchjon]

The forum has basically become the modern NFL. Questionable bans, weird double standards, too much political correctness, etc.. It's a completely different forum from what I entered in 2003.

I prefer moderation that makes sure debate doesn't veer into questionable territory (insults, personal attacks, etc). Mods swooping in and banning people who have differing opinions from the general GAF zeitgeist is troubling. I don't agree with banning people because they don't support gay marriage; and no, I would not advocate banning someone who argued against interracial marriage either. If the person is not causing trouble or making personal insults/attacks, what does it matter.

Nor do I like the general hive mind that sets in. Whether it's the liberal bias (disclaimer: I am a liberal) in political threads or the inability to have an intelligent conversation on the gaming forum if you offer an opinion that goes against the grain. People get ganged up on, accused of trolling, etc

Yeah, GAF has changed a lot. It often hinders discussion, I haven't posted a lot of stuff for fear of being misinterpreted.

I think there are two main problems: Some really questionable rules (I can talk more openly in front of my grandma than anonymously in a forum when it comes to certain words, what's up with that?) and not enough clarity when they are installed.

I think the number of people banned due to using the c-word, usually not even directed at somebody, when it was only really explained in one post hidden deep in one thread in OT, has got to be in the high double, if not triple digits.

 

[V_Arnold]

At no point did I or anyone else suggest that. Of course good health is to be desired. But whining about the costs of obesity on healthcare is misguided.

Ah, I see. I do not envy citizens of the USA with all the healthcare problems and debates. Do not envy them for a second.

Spoiler

Okay, for the mountains and forests and the deserts, I do.

 

[Dead Man]

Ah, I see. I do not envy citizens of the USA with all the healthcare problems and debates. Do not envy them for a second.

Spoiler

Okay, for the mountains and forests and the deserts, I do.

Nor do I. Except for those things.

 

[Xun]

I don't have much to argue about, but yes, I do think it's a bit more strict than it needs to be.

It's certainly gotten more extreme in policing.

Im seeing way too much of banning for what appears to be opinion, and that is a definite cause of concern.

Most definitely.

 

[CrushDance]

While generally I think the moderating team is pretty respectable and acquit themselves well, I think the uneasy distinction between what's a choice and what's innate has led to some problematic decision-making on moderating policy.

It seems that things that are a part of a person's genetic makeup or what they feel they were "born with" (race, sex, gender identity, sexuality, weight) are always vigorously protected, but other aspects (religion, political orientation) are much fairer game to criticize, caricature, or "hivemind troll." And while this makes some sense, it's coming from a sort of liberal viewpoint that recognizes that these secondary identities are somewhat lesser and not as "inherent" as the others (and therefore fair game to criticize), when some religious people would argue that they've been "born with it" in the same sense a transgender person may feel they were "born with it."

Um. Let's just pretend for a moment that a person is born in isolation. Would they be superstitious and see/view things with awe and make up explanations. Or would they say "Jesus died and rose again!", or "Allah is great!"? How in the world can a person be born with knowledge before they learn? I take superstition as reasonable for human beings without knowledge. Religious texts? No way. To claim that someone can be born with a belief in a specific God, rules and behaviour is ludicrous. During human development, the brain undergoes a lot of growth and you become who you will be on a base level. Gender, sex, height, weight, skin colour, eye colour, hair colour, etc. At no point in this process does a persons brain say: "Oh no, I forgot to pick a religion for myself!". And I'm not saying that to mock religion or come off as condescending. People are not born with knowledge of anything concrete. Only the basics of breathing, eating and reproduction. From that point, everything else is secondary.

And to the people saying that there's bannings going on for opinions. Could you please cite some? I'm honestly curious as to what these opinions were/are and the context.

 

[Milchjon]

The thing is, a lot of the policies are easily defendable, no one would say that it's better to be disrespectful towards women/gays/transgender people/minorities. But when you set them in stone and ban any usage of some terms instead of looking at the context and deciding whether someone is an asshat or if the rules of GAF just don't really apply to real world situations and therefore someone might just be ignorant to them, it doesn't improve the quality of the discussions. It makes it worse.

Edit: By "not applying to real world situations" I mean that there's a different level of agreement, not that the are necessarily wrong in their intent. There's stuff on GAF which would probably not be received well in most social contexts, while you can make jokes in real life that wouldn't go over well on GAF

One example would be the transgender discussion. Of course common sense could tell you that it's very disrespectful to call someone "him" when it should be "her". But at the same time you cannot forget that most people have zero experience with any part of the transgender community. You can usually tell pretty easily whether it's done with malice.

 

[Boss Doggie]

To be honest, it goes either way. Sometimes it feels they are far too lenient, sometimes it's the other way around.

 

[Trent Strong]

people calling all saudi arabians a "bunch of fucks" or making snide remarks about "islam being the religion of peace..ROFL". in what context is that acceptable to you? people also saying about the middle east "i wouldnt want to live in that shithole"

how are these not bannable?

This is bullshit when it comes to Christianity. Mods actively post in threads where child rapist priest jokes and demeaning unicorn analogies are drawn. Not only don't they do a fucking thing but some mods have literally sanctioned it in said threads.

Please don't pretend that moderation in regards to Christianity is something that it's not.

Christianity and Islam are the world's biggest religions. Huge numbers, influence and power, etc. Atheists are a tiny minority.

 

[corporate cheerleader]

It could be a bit more stricter in Gaming, that's about it.

 

[teruterubozu]

It's strict enough. I personally don't like the "trend bans" - when something suddenly becomes prohibited without ample warning, then eases up a few months later. I've been nailed once or twice with those "wait, that's bannable now??"

 

[TheChewyWaffles]

In answer to OP: Depends on whether or not you hold the mob's opinions on things.

 

[THRILLH0]

Christianity and Islam are the world's biggest religions. Huge numbers, influence and power, etc. Atheists are a tiny minority.

Fucking lol if you think that's somehow any sort of justification.

 

[Trent Strong]

Fucking lol if you think that's somehow any sort of justification.

It's the same reason people can post those "white people" dancing gifs.