-->
@Mharman
Yes, anything other than death threats or telling people to kill themselves should be allowed imo
Is this supposed to be a joke?
Posts
Total:
120
In addition, the idea of what is considered a personal attack is very nuanced and everyone has their own opinion on it. For this reason, we should allow members to make personal attacks. There will be many flame wars in the short term, but in the long run there will. e less, as those members will be so sick of each other that they will eventually ignore each other.
-->
@drafterman
I think it's frankly very weird that people are suggesting that there should have been actual bannings instead of locking a thread, as if banning is somehow less of a reaction. Bannings are actual punishments against specific people. Locking a thread isn't even a punishment against anyone.
I think that if someone is flagrantly violating a rule, they should be personally warned and if they continue then temporarily banned. I understand that thread locking has its uses, but from what I could see it was one or two particular user causing 90% of the problems in that thread, and drawing other users into it, who eventually responded in kind. They're also users who have been belligerent, nasty, and incoherent in other threads as well. Where there's a common denominator, individual discipline for the arsonist seems better than running around putting out fires.
-->
@Mharman
as those members will be so sick of each other that they will eventually ignore each other.
That has never happened in the entire history of the Internet.
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Alternatively, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
-->
@drafterman
Sui_Generis and YYW/coal ignore each other for th most part. It's better than constant short bursts of flame.
-->
@Vader
@Mharman
Agree strongly on personal attacks. While it's true that DDO's CoC banned them, it was pretty much never enforced. Personal attacks can be pretty much anything unflattering said about someone; I can say 'this person is dumb', 'this person is a troublemaker', 'this person believes evil things' and they're all 'personal attacks' even if I can defend them as facts.
I still remember the thread that attracted me to DDO when it was in its 'golden age'. It was charleslb, an orthodox communist, debating a bunch of libertarians and taunting them in a jocular manner, while they ribbed his 'sesquipedalian verbiage', as he put it. It just seemed like a fun and at the same time enlightening place to be. Putting kid mittens on everyone, imo, just builds up resentment until you have a colossal flame war.
Threats and doxxing should obviously be off bounds, but a little ribbing never hurt anybody.
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Agreed
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Verbal cyberbullying has driven people to suicide. Saying it's never hurt anyone shows total insensitivity. Everything is ribbing to the one dishing it out
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
While I kinda understand. (And I remember on an old defunct forum we had a rant forum where personal attacks were allowed provided the other person was in the thread)
My main issue is that even if personal attacks are allowed, abuse is obviously out of bounds: and it becomes a grey area of when does a personal attack become abuse. Personal attacks do make it much more obvious what is and is not acceptable in that regards. As a moderator it’s much easier to enforce the personal attack aspect than try and figure out when it becomes abusive and over the line.
Most importantly - you just have to see createdebate for what can happen when personal attacks are allowed and there’s low levels of moderation.
They're fairly inexpensive, and according to RM they can save lives!
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Ramshutu agreed with me.
-->
@Ramshutu
This is why I like having a policy that isn't enforced, as weird as that may seem. For example, on DDO when people started telling others that they should kill themselves or other far-out-of-line stuff the no insults policy was called upon to punish them. But it wasn't if someone just called someone a moron, or said they were a detriment to the site, or mocked them. It was essentially just there for Airmax to invoke when people crossed over a line that is a 'I'll know it when I see it' kind of legal standard.
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
No. Talk with respect to your fellow darter or get off the site. Simple.
We should keep this up RM, it's pretty surreal. I make a cogent point, then there's some random bellowing and sobbing from you. We offset each other quite nicely.
Unfortunately not: while I mostly agree that personal attacks should be prohibited; a personal attack - or even several personal attacks isn’t cyber bullying.
I don’t think calling someone a d*** is the biggest problem in the world, or warrants severe action - but allowing it can let things escalate.
-->
@Christen
I'll apologize for this. I should've said who cares.Who gives a f*ck? https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3010/post_links/126487
they can't dog-pile me just like what they did to bsh1 https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3010/post_links/126538
How was this swearing, bad words or a personal attack?
Please a conspiracy theorist telling me I am wrong. You need help. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3010/post_links/126540
Please answer the question above here as well while also stating a better way for me to frame this. He is a conspiracy theorist.
This also goes to show like in his long-ass thread https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3010/post_links/126543
Is ass a swear now?
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I actually think that Christen was overall trolling. 80% of what he quoted was out-of-context word-twisting. He even quoted me when I was literally defending Bsh1, by using what I said others were saying about Bsh1 as something I attacked Bsh1 with (the scumbag comment).
-->
@RationalMadman
@TheRealNihilist
Speedrace did say that everything I quoted contributed to it getting locked, so you two need to talk to him about anything you disagree with, not me.
Also I was worried that if I quoted every full comment instead of just the part with the bad words and stuff then my post would exceed the 5000 character limit, so I apologize if it looks like I was quoting things out on context.
And yes. The a-word is a bad word. I would get in trouble for saying that word as a kid.
-->
@Christen
Speedrace doesn't know what he is doing. If he did he would be the one revealing the information. If he is not allowed to make the information public. Why did he accept your public information thus essentially doing the same thing.Speedrace did say that everything I quoted contributed to it getting locked, so you two need to talk to him about anything you disagree with, not me.
Also I was worried that if I quoted every full comment instead of just the part with the bad words and stuff then my post would exceed the 5000 character limit, so I apologize if it looks like I was quoting things out on context.
Conspiracy theorist is what Wylted is. Is that still wrong if so how am I supposed to address is opinions without evidence?
How about the dog-piling comment?
And yes. The a-word is a bad word. I would get in trouble for saying that word as a kid.
I didn't think saying a body part would be bad and why are you comparing it to what kids say?
-->
@RationalMadman
I actually think that Christen was overall trolling. 80% of what he quoted was out-of-context word-twisting. He even quoted me when I was literally defending Bsh1, by using what I said others were saying about Bsh1 as something I attacked Bsh1 with (the scumbag comment).
Pretty much. Has a problem with the word ass and me saying the f-word not to a specific person just stating what I feel. I guess that is like the only thing that was out of line the rest is what Christen decides to say while Speedrace jumps in to agree with him on.
-->
@TheRealNihilist
It's not that I have "a problem with the word" it's that I think people should be professional, even when they disagree with each other. For the most part, people were not being professional in that thread.
If you still think Speedrace and I were trolling, I don't know what else to say.
I would like to point out that free speech does not apply to internet forums. You have the right to say, write, and think whatever you want, but a privately owned website has the right not to publish it. You (I'm speaking in general, not to a specific person) can say what you like about how it should be moderated, but the simple fact is that they have the right to moderate it any way they please.
-->
@Christen
Swearing is allowed unless it isn't vulgarly attacking/offensive
-->
@Vader
Well, Speedrace must have found all that swearing offensive and drew the line.
-->
@Christen
I will support his decision and put my belief. I see both sides of the party as correct, but I will support mod since I am technically a part of staff
Speedrace was correct to do what he did.
-->
@Vader
Shouldn't all staff have the little red/orange crown symbol above their usernames? You don't have it.
-->
@Christen
He's a liaison on discord, so he's a staff member, but not a moderator on DART itself.
-->
@Christen
SA said it, I work with them, but do not directly affect site and am a moderation directly to site. but Discord this relate to the site I am the head