jerdge Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 (First of all, sorry if this is the wrong forum: I did my best to locate the correct one. I would have posted in "Moderation", but it said it was "for player discussion with moderators regarding game policy only", and this is about the board.) Mild and Explicit Language / NamecallingMild expletives (crap, d*mn, etc) are frowned upon and should be extremely limited in use. OOC attacks using mild expletives will result in a warning. The only forum with a lesser restriction on the use of mild expletives is the RP forum. Excessive use of what are deemed mild expletives in the RP forums will result in a warning. Harsh Expletives (sh*t, f*ck, *ss, b**ch, etc.) are forbidden on all parts of the forum. Use of harsh explicatives, even in the RP forum, will be subject to warning from moderation up to and including forum access restriction. Namecalling is not an acceptable behavior on this forum no matter if it is IC/OOC. Doing so will result in a warn level raise. I have recently noticed that the use of some "mild" language / namecalling is at a certain extent common in AP, and not completely uncommon in OWF. I obviously don't know about the sanctions the Mods apply to the non-reported namecalling; in several instances the reports against namecalling were considered useful by the Mods, but I in a few cases the reporting individuals were told that there was no namecalling, or it wasn't "that" bad (to warrant an action against it). At this point I realized that I don't know exactly what is the correct interpretation of the rule I quoted above. From it I could work out: It would be preferable to never use mild expletives. The use of mild expletives should anyway be extremely limited. Always. even in the RP forums. The OOC use of mild expletives is forbidden and it is a warnable offence. Harsh expletives are always forbidden and using them grants (at least) a warn. Namecalling "is not an acceptable behavior on this forum no matter if it is IC/OOC", therefore even the IC use of them may result in a warn (though this is not granted, due to Rule 2). I have to say that Rule 2 and 5 seem at some extent conflicting to me. I don't want to cite/link/quote specific cases: this is not an "appeal" - or I would have PM-ed SoE - and I want to avoid "flame-wars". While encouraging the readers to not try to locate the specific reports I took my examples from, I'd have said that all of the following were controversial and should have lead to something (not necessarily a warn): Calling people "retards" in the OWF (Rules 3 and 5). Suggesting in the OWF that someone is an "idiot" (even if making a hypotetical like "what idiot would do what you do?"). Making an OOC post in an IC forum and calling people "idiots" in that post (Rules 1, 2, 3 and 5). Calling someone "fool" (or in any other "mild" way) in the OWF (Rules 3 and 5). I want to specify that these "examples" must be imagined in their context, that is that of aggressive and hostile posts. I'm not saying that things like this should be a problem: "Hey jerdge you really look like a fool with that flag on your avatar lol " Rather, the following would probably be a problem (if OOC): "Your arguments are flawed, you are a joke, and you show you are a huge fool every time you open your mouth. I'd be happy not to have to read you anymore." For example, this is a good example of an aggressive post that doesn't break the forums rules because it's in an IC area, and would have broken them, was it OOC. I would be happy if a (CIVIL!) discussion could be started about this, and also if the Mods can help me/us to understand the line between legit and non-legit "namecalling". I finally would be happy if the posters would restrain from discussing what in their opinion is an acceptable behaviour on the forums: I'd love to discuss the implications of the rule I quoted over there, not the ("infinite") possible opinions we can have over the issue of namecalling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjav0 Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 Not sure about this. There should be some lenience in my opinion. And several moderator frequently post sentences that match your description of mild insults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Smythe Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 Members of the mod team, especially Senior Staff, don't like those kinds of allegations without proof. Accusing a Moderator of misconduct, including mod bias, needs to be proven with hard, factual evidence. Not hearsay and conjecture. tl;dr Don't make accusations about Moderators flaming or using foul language without proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted April 16, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 several moderator frequently post sentences that match your description of mild insults. Since I didn't provide any description of mild insults, you can't be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Xnut Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 Maybe the rule should just be made simpler, like: "Expletives are not allowed in hostile replies, mild expletives should be avoided, but can be used in friendly conversations" ? Another thing is, do we even need this rule? I mean most people can be pretty civil if they want to. Can't we just make it so that the person that are being targeted can report the post and ask for it to be edited? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort Pitt Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 anything that isnt censored it should be allowed any admin i believe can access the language tab for censored words and add new ones if they decide crap is bad... flame wars are started at the risk of the nation flaming... if they flame, they get the warn... example: stealing is bad, but robbers risk getting caught and do it anyway... a fool isnt expletive nor is it much insulting... im a fool because i tripped over another kid playing basket ball today... anything like 'you piece or crap' where an allowed word is substituting an expletive should be a warn anything like 'your a fool for saying that' should be a warnable offense because it isnt bad... fool isnt a bad word... retard isnt a bad word, but it is insulting, it should be a warn in some cases unless talking in the 'Water Cooler' about IRL... any of the major bad words or swear words that have to do with sex should be expletives... saying 'i thought you were crap, but now i realize your a good person' shouldnt really be warning because its not using it in offense... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sword of Estel Posted April 17, 2008 Report Share Posted April 17, 2008 Policy discussions belong only in Moderation if approved by the staff. Regardless this is a forum rule and not open for discussion so the point is moot. Advice for next time--if you find yourself apologizing pre-emptively if you've placed something in the wrong forum, you should PM a moderator to find out if/where the thread belongs. iLock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts