Outplayz

Sociology degree teaches you about real life

Outplayz, if you did bet, you'd be on your way to the bank right now.

You are a forum-main to extreme degrees.

You probably know much more about forum politics 

Bsh1 and I are the 2 highest ranked debaters on the site 

Once you admit that this is not your area of expertise,

Popularity DOES make the 'edge' in close debates.

Other than that, honesty is superior.

It was not me, which is why Wylted was banned right now. Castin was shown evidence of Wylted's dishonesty, Wylted was unable to provide her evidence of the truth of his allegation (because none existed), and, based on that, coupled with Wylted's confession to Virt, Castin made a determination. Honestly, that quote doesn't even sound like me.

Yeah it didn't sound like you, and since this is all about lying... i didn't trust he was telling the truth. I imagine he would have screenshot it if it was real. That is reverse bullying in my opinion so i think you guys made a good judgment call in showing you won't put up with that kind of behavior. No disagreements from me. 

They sometimes are, but I could not disagree more strongly with the sentiment that they usually are.

Fair enough. I don't think either of us will know for sure since there is no way to test it. I just have a gut feeling, and from some observation, people don't vote honestly. Plus, to add in people go around asking for friends to vote on debates... i think that's a little cheating too. Bc there is a good chance your friend will vote in your favor. All in all, i don't think the debates are perfect by any stretch of the imagination. There is quite a bit of dishonesty that goes down. Maybe not up to the "usually" mark... but definitely no lower or equal to the "rarely" mark.  

I wouldn't agree with that, tbh. Debaters are almost always literally honest (and also mostly honest in spirit), and where "lies" occur, they are usually mistakes. And, most of the time, intentional lies are efforts to defame your opponent and to assassinate their character in order to extract a win. This kind of behavior is unprecedented on either DDO or DART, at least during my years on the site. I know DDO was a bit more wild west before I arrived, but still, this behavior is beyond the pale.

The debates are nothing more than a popularity contest. If you really think votes are honest without this bias... you are just trying to hang on bc you participate in them. This doesn't mean everyone is like that, but i am willing to put my money down on more than not. I hope that quote wasn't you btw... that is pretty malicious even by my standards. 

Bro, I've spent the better part of two decades considering it. Who are you to tell me what I have and haven't considered?

The empirical observation and experience of reality.

I can help you with the hook and lyrics. I know your style, it's just not something I listen to too often. 

I have a bunch of rap beats on my keyboard. It's a workstation keyboard, but i don't have any means to download it onto my computer at the moment. I have to get another music producing software. But i would be down to make a beat. I don't have an accent at all... if you mean ethnically... i sound like a typical white boy. But.. i don't think i have the voice to rap. I don't have that specific accent ;( wish i did. 

Just to let you know anyone can read this... I don't want you to 'dox yourself' more than you feel comfortable with everyone knowing. This may feel like a chat but it's public.

I don't really want to post my thoughts on ethnicities and races/dynasties here. My conspiracy theories and harsh/elitist views (if any) are for me and those I trust. I can say this: Persians are blatantly one of the most corrupt regimes in history, you should not want to be associated with them or interested in who you descend from there and the reason is that if you go back far enough we're all basically from a smart, cunning, asshole who outsmarted or outfought the other males to rape the women in the vicinity. That's how the earliest humans reproduced, that's actually what inspired us to think that something like Ancient Egypt etc is a less barbaric or cruel thing to go for and why monarchy lasted for Millenia.

Do you perceive people who block you as bullies? Or think that the act of blocking you is bullying you?

I imagine people that easily block people also go complaining behind their back trying to get them in trouble. I would say that's pretty toxic. Blocking a person mid conversation when you're debating ideas. Then to proceed and talk about the person putting words in said person's mouth without the person now being able to correct the person or back themselves up... yeah, i think that's bullying too. I don't think the act of blocking is bullying itself per se, it's mainly what comes after. But I guess it's sorta bullying since you do it in order to punish and make the other person feel like crap. Since there is that emotional or mental aspect to it that some people would suffer, then yeah... it's bullying. It's just a passive aggressive form of it. 

Well I can certainly see where you're coming from there, but I haven't heard any staffer talking about implementing changes that drastic to the block feature, so I don't think there's currently cause for alarm. 

Oh... i know. I don't think the mods are that bad lol. I'm sure they understand the implications of doing something like that. It would mess everything up big time. Plus, it would give them so much more work in people complaining and trying to get themselves somehow unblocked or able to comment/vote. I imagine a lot of fake accounts will be opened to bypass it too. It would be a disaster... that was my point. 

😄 All right man. Send me the rap video once you make it. 

I'm horrible at rap lyrics. Maybe i'll ask RM to help me out. I'll make the beats and he can do the rap ;p 

Blocking by random users wouldn't be an issue AT ALL under my regime. I would make everyone happy and feeling cared for.

Well i simply disagree bc i'm 100% it will be abused. But that is under the current mods, i have no idea how you would make it work but if you have a logical way i would be all ears. As long as it's just for everyone, i'm always on board.

In regards to modding. I had a short run with Secular on the religion forum in DDO. I felt Secular and I would have done an excellent job bc we were both pretty good at analyzing each situation to see what's best to do. I wish that could have gone on a little longer bc i feel we had a lot of potential. The problem there was Max since he fell off the map pretty fast into our modship. I was asked to do it here on the religion forum, but not in an official capacity. I won't bother if it's not in an official capacity bc then it just feels like i'm ratting people out.  

It's already time for the bell ringing to start. Pretty early this year. Do you give to the Salvation Army or other faith based charities? Do you not? If you don't do you have a specific reason or just refuse to give to Christian charities? Do you make an effort to give to secular charities? 

How much time do you spend researching a charity before giving. How many of you just give to gofundme's without some background on the cause or person. 

To be frank: Some people will overreact and block you, yes. But overreacting to them blocking you scarcely makes you much better.

Did you mean not overreacting to them blocking me makes me better? I'm not that good of a person lol. If someone disrespects me and runs.. i will have something to say about it. I don't like bullies, and bullies come in all shapes and sizes. I make sure they learn their lessons. 

In regards to blocking i fully agree with you. I was referencing the "extra features" part of the discussion with Rat. If there was extra features to the block function where i can't even enter a thread, or i can't comment on a debate... that's extra and it would be a restraint on your freedom. To be fair, he only wanted it on the comments of debates.. but that's bc he uses those the most so for him it would be more convenient to block people from entering. I don't see why that eventually wouldn't apply to forums too. All in all, i think it's a very bad idea bc it will be abused. People block others for no reason at all other than not liking them. And, that is what i see the block function used for the most... if all these people couldn't enter specific debates in the comments bc one person thought to block them... it would be a mess. That was the reason i introduced ex ante and ex post reasoning. The ex ante reasoning on this would be... once everyone can do it, there could be a potential i wouldn't be able to enter any debate where i disagree with the person. Why wouldn't i block everyone i disagree with and make sure only people that will vote for me can get on? That will happen. 

That would be jail, not prison. 

Oh come on... let me feel like a bad-ass for just one second.    

Quite clearly, bsh1 seems to be talking about "targeting" a user with harassment. 

Yes, i've come to trust bsh1's decision bc i do think he is trying his best. My problem was in what would constitute targeting and harassing users. Bc i've all too often noticed users jumping to the conclusion that they are being harassed and/or targeted. And in ways, that is unavoidable. If you frequent the religion forum and there is only two or three active threads... you're going to be around that person and likely addressed by that person if they vehemently disagree with you. My take is if it is substantive, as in the person is still trying to ask questions and dig deeper, even if it's done in a rude way, that shouldn't constitute harassment. Harassment to me is going around calling a person an idiot or deluded incessantly without adding any kind of substance. Since i've known Gold for such a long time, i'm aware that is not what he usually does. He usually asks questions and probes. With that said, i don't know the whole story and i'm not a mod in any way to know the history of what got him banned. And bsh1 said that to me in PMs when i told him how Gold usually acts.. he said i don't know the full picture. All i can do is trust moderation at that point. And given how they take feedback and listen to concerns, even if they don't agree.. that's really all i can ask for and trust he did a good job. I don't really see too many reason's not to trust that. Although i have concerns on how involved mods should be... i can see these concerns fading as this site goes on. Which makes me think they are actually paying attention to our concerns. 

You know, what i've been thinking about is a past discussion thread bsh1 brought up about punishment being public to other users. I disagreed at that time but i'm starting to think it would be a good thing if it's public what users did to get banned. When i think about it, that's how it is in life. If you get convicted of a crime, your mug shot, your crime, is all published for everyone to see. That is bc people will know what will get them in trouble. In that, people know to follow the law or else they can also get in trouble for whatever they read online others have. So, in some sort of minimal capacity... i think it would actually help, and put a lid on conspiracy theories of why someone got banned, if mods made these decisions public. At the very least, per. bans, preferably temp bans too.  I don't know, maybe i'll rejuvenate a thread topic on that at some point.  

Nowhere did Outplayz ever try to insinuate that bank robbers shooting clerks was equivalent in any sense to banning someone on an online forum, in moral or practical terms.

What he DID say, and which I am pointing out as a fallacy, is that punishing a bank teller for refusing to give money to a bank robber who is threatening to shoot a person is equivalent to blocking someone on an internet website, because he claims that both are examples of a "punishment" taking place.

I can tell you this: it's nothing to do with quality of the particular game you're using at the time. It's entirely about handling multiple at once.

So since i'm not using it for games. Do you mean i can render a video, search online, have a youtube video up, etc... without tampering with performance? And by performance i mean speed. 

If this was their policy, I imagine abusive posters could be at large for a long time. Problem members aren't always gonna hand you a gift-wrapped slam dunk reason to finally ban them. But "many cases of being a jerk" isn't really how I'd describe it. 

Do you really think blocking members punishes them unfairly?

That means I could "punish" anyone on this site, right now.

Yes. You are punishing a user when you block them... duh. 

You... think the purpose of the comments section... is for non-involved third parties... to "back up" their buddies... by attacking one of the debate participants?

I never said that's the only reason they're there. Why don't we just get rid of comments all together to protect your fragile ego.

I don't feel the need to continue this conversation. Good day, sir.

I'll take that as you have no substance to add. That was apparent anyways. 

False equivalence fallacy. I'm just going to leave it at that.

A stronger block feature (such as preventing people from spamming the comments of your debate after you have blocked them).

Yes. 

The comments section should be a privilege, not a right. If you can politely comment, great. If you argue a little, fine. But if you annoy the actual participants in the debate to the point where they block you, tough luck. If they aren't a participant in the debate, and one of the actual participants has them blocked, then they can go start their own debate or forum thread if they need to discuss the topic that badly. 

I'm not asking for "extra punishment" by any stretch of the imagination. Just empower users to kick annoying jackasses out of their comments section so they don't become a distraction. This is not the outrageous idea you are making it out to be. 

However, I do think that both the current rules are too loose and the block feature needs to be buffed up significantly. If users could solve their own problems by simply blocking the worst offenders, then it would save the mods from having to get involved at all. 

You have to consider the implications of what you are asking for. Here is an example in law that we encounter all the time. It has to do with ex ante and ex post reasoning. Say someone robs a bank, puts a gun to a customers head and asks the teller for money. The teller refuses and the robber kills the customer. Should the courts punish the teller for not giving money? In this case, courts ruled no, taking the ex ante reasoning. Why? Bc if they would have, robbers now can go to future banks and threaten with life and get money. It gives them more arsenal. People may think that is unjust, but judges have to consider what will cause the least harm and in this case, the future of customers willing to put their money in banks. 

Now, in your scenario you want to do more to the block feature... what are the implications of that? What will it do to the discourse? What will it do to future people wanting to come to this site? What will it do to people that hold opposing theories from coming to this site to discuss them? And i should ask you... what do you propose? The person that is blocked not being able to comment on the debate? The person that's blocked not being able to enter the thread? Do you think that's fair... and do you think this site would be more attractive? 

I would say no. Bc what you want to do and many of the other people running around saying abuse is turn this site into what "they" want. What "they" think is appropriate. What "they" think is good discourse. I'm sorry... but all i see is reverse bullying and passive aggressive forms of abusive and selfish behavior.

As of now, it's perfectly fine. You block the person and you don't get notifications and don't have to converse with said person. If they follow you around, ignore them. If they become abusive in their actions... report them and i'm sure the mods will take care of it bc the mods on this site are involved. Sometimes more than i'd like but guess what... i don't expect them to do exactly what i like or else i would be a hypocrite in everything i just said.  It's a fine balance and why i'm not mad at the mods or dislike them.  They are doing as good as they can, and i can only voice my opinion in opposition and hope that they adopt a little of my logic. I don't expect them to fully adopt all of my logic.

To ask for extra punishment makes no sense to me unless you can propose it in a fair way that will still promote people of different opinions and temperaments from coming here.