At least now I know there is a definite stance taken, but I would have to agree with this post.
Thank you for responding Mumei
I really wasn't even trying to be a snitch :/
Is GAF too strict?
- Thread starter Kraftwerk
- Start date
- Status
At least now I know there is a definite stance taken, but I would have to agree with this post.
Thank you for responding Mumei
I really wasn't even trying to be a snitch :/
So should we expect these kinds of bans in the future? Should I stay away from threads that include posters who describe that they are sexually active? Should I stay away from threads that discuss porn?
Is saying "would smash/bang/smang" along the same lines as saying "masturbate"?
There were also people asking for pics/video and encouraging sex in that thread that didn't get banned.
Is saying "would smash/bang/smang" along the same lines as saying "masturbate"?
There were also people asking for pics/video and encouraging sex in that thread that didn't get banned.
goldenpp72
Member
This is just sort of what happens when people are uptight and you allow any kind of person to be part of the same group, it ends up weeding out people (for better and worse) in the process.
If at one point the forum was all males, the males can look at hot girls and talk about masturbation, now the idea some other users might be offended exist, and as such you're no longer allowed to do that. While it's nice to have all kinds of people, people being so easily offended by anything does causes for a pretty uptight feeling aura at times. People are having to constantly adapt to new unwritten social rules on a forum, and while fighting hate and bigotry is great, i'm not sure if I care to be sensitive to those who get offended about masturbation and men being attracted to women. I personally would have no issue if women looked at hot guys and admitted they too masturbate, but I guess it's evil or something.
Most of this forum is probably not uptight, but I feel as if a select few probably never have gone outside if some of the stuff i've seen people complain about here offends them.
matt360
Member
GAF is great, but that doesn't mean it can't be better. There is undeniably an ultra-left, ultra politically correct hive mind mentality that permeates throughout the site, and God help you if you don't fall into that line of thinking. It reeks of university students who are educated and civil for the most part, yet are uncultured, lack world experience and are unable to accept the possibility of being wrong.
I felt the bannings in the Chick Fil A thread were complete bullshit. I was honestly disgusted by that. And the fact that I was so disappointed made me realize that perhaps I am investing too much of myself to an internet message board.
So is GAF too strict? Not really. No place is perfect, but for me GAF is head and shoulders above the rest. I don't agree with some of the moderations, but that's not my call.
I felt the bannings in the Chick Fil A thread were complete bullshit. I was honestly disgusted by that. And the fact that I was so disappointed made me realize that perhaps I am investing too much of myself to an internet message board.
So is GAF too strict? Not really. No place is perfect, but for me GAF is head and shoulders above the rest. I don't agree with some of the moderations, but that's not my call.
Perhaps GAF isn't the forum for you if you think treating gay people with respect is "ultraleft".
Count Dookkake
Member
"Politically correct" is as misunderstood and misused as "pretentious."
goldenpp72
Member
I don't really think so, this forum is very strict on being sensitive to any culture aside the ones that go against the majority of the cultures here. If you're a religious person, you likely don't get to have an opinion here if you practice the views of your faith, are you a furry? Well you used to be a running joke here, but sensitivity tells you now that being that is ok and acceptable behavior. I'm not sure if bannings take place for people who would say, I think that's weird or poke fun at that community, but I could definitely see it coming down to that if it hasn't already.
The fact is, one of the social crutches many use is to poke fun at groups they deem strange, and in the end the group that doesn't do that is the one that is protected every time. People make fun of fat people, gay people, gamers, religious people, etc, and on this forum, some of that is ok, and others it's instant ban if not perma ban depending. Just the other day people were ragging on pale people. I'm pale, I don't want people who poked fun at pale people to be banned and made example of, I just make my point to them if I find it worth noting and move along. Then again, the witch hunt/feed X user to the lions doesn't get me going either which seems to be about what half of this forum ultimately wants to have happen. In reality, the terms of service might as well just say you're not allowed to make fun of anyone, because inevitably, someone on this forum will be potentially sensitive to any form of insult, so just don't make fun of anyone ever.
Thankfully, I'm agnostic so the slights against religious views are not a personal bother, but when one moment you can ogle a hot girl and make a joke about masturbation, and suddenly that's bannable the next day, I think it's a bit unusual and yes, perhaps a bit PC. It becomes more and more censored to a point that someday, this is going to be like a gentlemens club where only the highest dialect is allowed.
Perhaps that's what people want though, in the end the majority view will be what wins out, and you either learn to adapt, keep your mouth shut, or get banned. It's then up to how much you enjoy being part of the community.
Don't expect any kind of legitimate justification. It's either going to become a new policy or be left behind and forgotten.
Count Dookkake
Member
Yeah, but it is.
Trent Strong
Banned
I guess it's just a matter of time before saying that you find a woman physically attractive is bannable.
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
Damn, am I good or what.
Psychological Intellect
Banned
Wait, what happened to my post?
The Illuminati happened.
NeoGAF
BELIEVE
Now hush, or you will be silenced.
blame space
Banned
how many posts will they delete?
Team Filler
Member
You monster! How dare you think any human form is pleasing to the eyes!
Nothing like a more oppressive atmosphere to help foster discussion.
Forever lost in the abyss, drowning in black ink and red tape.
Trent Strong
Banned
You're right. My bad.
Psychological Intellect
Banned
Seriously though, why'd my post get deleted?
Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy?!
Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy?!
In my opinion, yes. I have to provide justification every time I ban someone, and I cannot ban people for personal reasons; people can only be banned for breaking the rules as defined by the forum more broadly. Ive asked Evilore to be more lenient, but to no avail.
You have already PMed a moderator about this. We have already replied back to you.
You have already PMed a moderator about this. We have already replied back to you.
I'm not sure if you saw my post way back, but I commented on how you are an incredibly skilled mediator when it comes to controversial discussions. I have a hard time finding any bias in a lot of things you say, at least in topics I've participated in. You are also very generous. I appreciate you as a mod.
Monocle
Member
Damn liberals, always complaining when millions of people are treated like subhuman degenerates. Reminds me of the time that one guy in Germany got a little carried away with his politics and everyone flipped their lid.
GAF just doesn't respect alternative points of view.
Psychological Intellect
Banned
If you're talking about what I think you're talking about then yea, I guess I did get a reply, even though it wasn't much of a reply(more of a confirmation that the pm was sent). But whatever, I guess I might be pushing it?
I don't think complaints from people who have been permabanned is something that's acceptable here.
Correct. It is explicitly against the rules to act as a proxy for banned members. They are not able to speak on this forum for a reason.
Woah, that thread is the poster child for inconsistent moderation. Seems like someone got tired after page 1 and went off for a pint instead.
Not that I could do any better when 'the line' is as fuzzy as it is.
Psychological Intellect
Banned
((((
Monocle
Member
I suppose this is a matter of how you define political correctness. It seems to me that most of the time people complain about GAF being too politically correct, they want to say something that goes against basic human decency. Namely something racist, misogynistic, or homophobic.
Here's my somewhat reasonable theory on the sister's-friend-bannings:
We know that the mods on GAF aren't entirely independent in their actions. They communicate internally when a controversial ban happens, and before some are made as well. We know this was pretty unusual compared to how those kinds of comments are generally allowed here, and whoever banned those people made a bad judgement call. The bans are obviously inconsistent so it had to have been stopped somewhere. It was discussed between mods to leave it as is for at least one of these reasons but more likely both:
1. The bans are relatively short and people will probably forget quickly. The thread was locked so it can't be bumped to remind people of the bans.
2. Retracting that many bans at the same time would make it appear that a single or multiple mods were doing a bad job, and would probably cause an even greater outcry. Easier to just let it fade away and make sure it doesn't happen again.
We know that the mods on GAF aren't entirely independent in their actions. They communicate internally when a controversial ban happens, and before some are made as well. We know this was pretty unusual compared to how those kinds of comments are generally allowed here, and whoever banned those people made a bad judgement call. The bans are obviously inconsistent so it had to have been stopped somewhere. It was discussed between mods to leave it as is for at least one of these reasons but more likely both:
1. The bans are relatively short and people will probably forget quickly. The thread was locked so it can't be bumped to remind people of the bans.
2. Retracting that many bans at the same time would make it appear that a single or multiple mods were doing a bad job, and would probably cause an even greater outcry. Easier to just let it fade away and make sure it doesn't happen again.
Yeah the mod team probably needs to delineate what's what in terms of jokes and comments people can and cannot make, because it's all rather muddy and inconsistent. The forum has gotten remarkably puritanical in recent times, heh.
Well I certainly don't want to say anything homophobic, mysogynistic or racist. I know what you are talking about however.
I think GAF assumes that anyone with any sort of religious affiliation is just bursting at the seams ready to spit out venom and hatred. I don't have any of that burning desire inside me lol.
I do feel like I"m walking on eggshells any time I enter a thread where pictures of attractive women are being posted. Can I comment on how attractive, hot or sexy a woman is?
Besides, we all masturbate anyway. What is the deal with not being allowed to admit that we do it to pictures of attractive women? Seems like GAF is ok with the idea of porn. So which images am I allowed to comment on and how? We can objectify women in the privacy of our own home. Just don't admit that you do it? I know that there is a line, and that it probably follows common sense. The line is just blurry sometimes.
Is this a problem you have in real life? Are you never sure when it's acceptable to talk about wanting to masturbate?
I'm a guy, and frankly, I think there's already way too much talking about masturbating on this board. I mean, it's one thing if for some godforsaken reason you actually wanted to make a thread just about masturbating, then fine, talk about it, but it really doesn't need to be in every thread that a picture of a woman gets posted in. That's just creepy from my perspective. I mean, you may as well make a Twitter for your dick.
It's especially weird because it's about as far from gender-exclusive as you can get. Male-female, female-male, male-male, female-female, whatever, commenting on or even encouraging masturbation or other explicitly non-rape sexual activity toward someone you find attractive is acceptable to basically everyone. I don't care if you think it's gross, it's not harmful. Really. If you find it creepy that's fine but we don't need to protect people from it through preventing people from talking or through censorship.
Eh. I can see your point. I'm pretty tired. I think i'll let this one go.
I know how to keep the peace on GAF (for the most part). I'll keep doing it. This place is about 20x better than anything else anyway. I think we can all agree that the complaints made in this thread are relatively minor.
CrushDance
Banned
...I don't want to sound as if I'm picking on you...BUT. Your first point is something I disagree with. There is a poster here with a superman avatar who is a person of faith and he's a pro at deflecting. But there are a lot of posters who I have no problems with and are easy to talk too. Just like in real life, there are a lot of fanatics and a lot of moderates.
The reason why you and others feel this way is because this is a forum. A relatively closed environment where there isn't really any escape. Combine that with the social issues and politics since this is a mostly American forum, and you have the overwhelming feeling that you're describing. Nobody is out to get anyone really. People are just quick to grill certain posters because of their comments and affiliations.
And what's with the lusting/masturbating after women and being religious thing? Are there no conflicts there? No offense but this brings up the whole "We're only human" angle. None of us are perfect and those who believe they're superior are the ones most ridiculed on the forum.
I have been offended in this board and other several places, and I never had the urge to silence or censor my offender, or to poke a figure of authority to do it for me. I understand that improductive and stupid comments are detrimental to any kind of discussion, that trolls should be banned and that the "Ingore" button is a Godsend, but to use something as subjective as "someone feels offended" as a gauge for the offender's true intentions (even ethics) and "bannability" seems like a true mistake to me. Oversensitive people do exist, and idiots / racists / homophobes and the like use free speech as a rope to hang theirselves with.
CrushDance
Banned
So what type of things should we let slide?
matt360
Member
Come on now, seriously? For the record, I find the viewpoints of the Chick Fil A owner to be pretty shitty. I'm also a strong supporter of same-sex marriage. Me choosing or not choosing to patron Chick Fil A has absolutely nothing to do with respecting or disrespecting gay people.
Flaunting the fact that I can't wait to grab some Chick Fil A for lunch and then again for dinner is one thing, but being banned for stating that their chicken tastes good and that you see no reason to stop going is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.
Like I said, I think GAF is great. I think the vast majority of bannings are deserved, and I'm glad that a gaming forum exists where I am able to discuss a wide variety of topics in a relatively civil environment. The hive mentality does exist, and you'll be left in the cold should you decide to go against it, but it could be a lot worse.
CrushDance
Banned
People were banned for the context of their posts. Not for saying that the food was good. What purpose did saying "Chick fil A is great! Going to grab me some later on and ejoy those waffle fries!" in a obviously social issue thread?
That's akin to someone standing in-front of Foxconn holding(Insert CE device here) while smiling with the CEO and saying that they make great products. Shortly after another worked jumps to their death.
Context is everything.
Yep that thread made me disgusted too, just from the opposite direction matt was.
matt360
Member
I agree with you about context, but that's not how I remember it. I could be very, very wrong here, but I remember people being banned for mentioning anything positive about the restaurant chain. If the topic is still around I'll go check and confirm.
Devolution
Member
And I seem to recall people being banned for "oh yeah this tastes good" and "definitely eating there now since you're all whining."
CrushDance
Banned
It's cool. I don't disagree that there have been questionable bans, just trying to explain the Chick Fil A one.
I don't know, to tell the truth. Moderation is a hard work, I reckon, and the balance between stablished norms and case by case context is hard to implement. But since you asked for it, I think that a good example of the type of thing that I would personally let slide would be the whole "Things Latinos don't say". It is something that would sadden me to see it closed. I am a latino with a freshly peruvian nephew to celebrate, I know that some of said stereotypes are silly, but it is all in good fun and despite of a couple of people feeling offended, I would dare to say that the majority of us enjoyed it. The people shouting "racism" on that tread should really reserve their allegations for the Arizona's congressmen, I think.
The thing about freedom of expression is that it was created precisely in order to protect the opinions and postures that the majority of a society / group does not like and deems offensive. You don't tolerate people and attitudes that you like, do you? You do it with the ones that you don't. Unpopular points of view have the right to be debated, as long as they are properly backed up by some kind of rationale other than name - calling and fallacies (note that I am not saying that this is the case in GAF, if I am posting here it is precisely because I feel at ease on that regard).
CrushDance
Banned
But alas, this isn't the case with many of the things people are banned for. You can't debate the worth of someone else's life unless it's a end of the world scenario. There is no logic or reason good enough to claim that X is superior to Y for things they cannot choose. I see what you're saying, although I disagree slightly.
N
NinjaFridge
Unconfirmed Member
Poor taste for sure but that shouldn't be ban worthy imo.
- Status