Aloxamax said: Immahnoob said: It just fits perfectly, but wait, let's make it even better. Let's all take insults with no negative intent. That way we don't care and we don't have to censor ourselves. Hail Education! We should just focus on the majority, rather than the minority. We would need to find out what the majority actually wants, and it's not that easy. We could speculate of course, or maybe use our ''common sense''? It's easy to tell that people over the Internet aren't anywhere near as restrained as they are in real life (most of the time), so while a lot of people could easily 'insult' others or call them names that most would take as an insult, they aren't as good at receiving the same kind of treatment. It's true that the Internet isn't for everybody, but that doesn't mean that we should shun those that aren't ready for it. Most websites prefer to be severe with insults because people don't tend to be turned away for not being able to curse, whereas the opposite case is true. If whatever changes to the policy made it more severe or lax, how many users would MAL lose? How many users could it gain by applying the change? Would the mods have to work harder because of it? Would it cost them time and god forbid even money? Can they allow themselves to focus more on it as of right now? In what mood would the remaining users be? Would they complain even more? Make rant threads or would they happily accept the new changes? Is there even enough people that care about the issue for this discussion to be useful? It's possible that I'm overthinking this as people tend to act more like sheep than individuals and therefore are predictable and nothing to worry over, but meh. Or we could make a poll (see, Mellow's posts on last page). Now now, I never said shun, and I did exaggerate when I said "educate them", it's just that you should think of it this way, a lot of people like to bask in anonymity and just have fun arguing senseless topics or topics that have no place in real life (like taboo topics), but insults are even lower than this, you can hear them everywhere in real life, it's like censoring walking. And that's why I asked for a reform of the rules. What would change? People would probably be more lax in censoring themselves, they'll not care much about it, those that did not insult before will maybe try or will just stay at the same level, those that heavily censor themselves might run amok a bit then stop when it becomes something "normal", I'd say most regulars and new guys would like it, then they'll probably ask for a change again. Less rules means less needed time to moderate, money, well, I don't really think so. There's something else I hate about these type of things, nobody wants to test anything, it's like we're afraid of the littlest change. Rants about more insults? I doubt it. You'll probably get a thread with two pages at max. Check out my General discussions suggestion idea, only the regulars actually cared about it. They kind of are predictable, you can see that from what I'm writing to you. Battlechili1 said: Amaya-dono said: TallonKarrde23 said: in adra and pat's ideal world, everyone in this thread would be perfect vigilantes, would report you for that insult and you'd be banned.one is just a dipshit No reason to report it or get in trouble for that. It wasn't uncalled for and it wasn't done to harass anyone. Hehehehe, that dipshit could be anyone, am I right? But yeah, I detected that too, Pat's and Adramelech's world he would get skewered anyway. They don't want discrimination when talking about rules, they'd go as far as saying that nothing is relative anymore. Mod Edit: Removed reply to deleted post. |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 12:57 AM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
MellowJello said: At HB, saying something disagreeable to the community gets your post deleted by popular vote.And over at HB, they don't get instabannned for calling people idiots. In fact, were it not for their diabetic-inducing community coupled with the freedom to sling insults freely (to an extent), I'd probably be there right now. As with any topics such as this, people will spend 20+ pages arguing about something when they might not even necessarily disagree, but it's because they use the terms differently. For example, if a person says "Orange has red in it", and someone else says, "I disagree, orange is orange and red is red." And they enter into argument. This argument will never be resolved until someone steps in and say, well, wait a minute, when you say "red", what do you mean? And the Adramalech's of the world will be quick to shout that it's common sense, that such a thing is so obvious that it never needs to be defined, and that we should all take our own conceptions as granted and assume that everyone else agree. Upon closer inspection though, the first person says that red is defined by one of the primary colors, such that if you take red and mix it with some other color, it becomes orange. The second person admits that his conception of red is that it is a name representing a specific RGB value (255,0,0) or some specific spectrum of light such as 670nm. Thus, even something as simple as "red" is conceived differently by different people. The point of this analogy is that in 13 pages, nobody has comprehensively sought to define insult. Once someone defines "insult" then the mods can enforce it fairly by that definition. Without a definition, enforcement is necessarily arbitrary. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Make 25 new mods, people who are active instruct them to ban people for small amounts of time for rule infractions, 15-30 minutes after the 10th time you're at a day, after three more times you're permabanned. Simple. |
  |
BUTTDEVASTATOR said: Make 25 new mods, people who are active instruct them to ban people for small amounts of time for rule infractions, 15-30 minutes after the 10th time you're at a day, after three more times you're permabanned. Simple. How will mods know when to act and when not to? Disappointed rant: |
"Rejoice! We are humans— we are the most talented people! Precisely because we were born without any ability— we can achieve anything— this is the will of the weakest race!" – Sora, ‘No game No life Vol.01’ |
| I think a member should firstly think about why they are about to insult another member. Pause for a moment and ask yourself, Is it necessary for me to react this way? Certainly if a member is insulted by another member, they'll want to defend them self. But sometimes walking away is the bigger thing to do, to prevent further harm. It's not easy to refrain from using harmful words towards someone in those times. However, most of the time, it's just not worth it. If someone is seriously bothering you, then avoid them, or block them. Continue to defend yourself or your topic in a decent manner. I feel that moderators should act when either someone who is genuinely being harassed reports the harassing comment(s), or if they happen to discover harassment while browsing MAL. Using the report link will bring moderator attention to possible harassment more quickly. Reporting a comment like "the color blue sucks", when you're a fan of the color blue isn't a real threat. Calling someone an 'idiot' for liking it is another story. I'm pretty sure that before removing and/or editing posts, forum moderators take the time to read through the thread where they are present, so that they can understand where everyone is coming from. I don't think the weight of the harassing words are the real issue, but rather whether a user feels offended or not. Several people could throw several unique insults my way, and yes, one of those insults may hurt more than another. But ideally, users should feel comfortable posting and commenting around MAL. An insult can push a user away from the community, so some level of order should be maintained so that dozens of people aren't offended every day. As for bans, I think it would be effective if a person who uses any kind of insult - for the first time, receives a half-hour ban. This allows the user to understand that what they've done isn't allowed around here, but it's neither too light nor too harsh. It's like a time-out. Anyone who repeats an action they've been temporarily banned for multiple times deserves a longer or even permanent ban, as the only conclusion seems to be that they are purposely breaking the rules. For further clarification, I personally know how it feels to be the victim of harassment on MAL. I did not report the person who harassed me (verbally) calling me a very harsh term. I was offended at the time and sometimes I remember this person's words. Yes, it was wrong of this person to say this to me, but using a different hurtful remark would have been just as wrong. I am not saying that some comments do not hurt more than others. I am questioning why some members of MAL's community sometimes choose to use these comments rather than leaving a thread, or continuing to back the point they are making in a thread politely. Everyone on MAL has a different personality, so not everyone is going to act and react in exactly the same ways. But MAL has rules for everyone regardless. And everyone can follow them regardless of their personalities. With all due respect, I don't think it matters which 1 of 100 insults a person chooses to use, but rather how often they are making offenses. It matters that we have an awareness that everyone is able to be offended at times, as we are human. And an awareness of what kind of behavior is not allowed here. Considering several unique harmful words, should someone who uses one of them receive a longer ban than someone who uses another one of them? I personally don't think so. A 30 minute time out ban will show these users that insults are not acceptable here. Anyone who repeatedly insults others must be intentionally breaking the rules, since, having received a ban, is aware that this kind of behavior is not allowed. And thus, they should receive a lengthier ban. |
LeahOct 30, 2013 3:17 PM
  |
AnimeCritic101 said: An insult is an insult, whether it's "witty" or it's immature.For the record, I'm not saying we should condone sarcastic insults. I'm just saying it's a lot less immature, and there's a lot less of a chance that you will get banned. And saying there's less of a chance it gets you banned is implying that insulting someone with sarcasm is a great way to imply that the receiving user is too stupid honky tonky to understand sarcasm or that they were just insulted. Mod Edit: Removed irrelevant replies. |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 12:47 AM
| If only Adramelech would understand that "fun" can be had with "constructive arguments" too. I find it fun arguing, be it a "constructive argument" be it an "useless" argument (I can't see any useless arguments here). And yes, that's what I kept on asking, what's your definition of "insult", what is that we are banning right now, why are we doing it? It clearly implies it's a "bad" thing, but why? Nobody wants to answer this, everything is granted for these people. If people say it's bad, it must mean it is, that's called the bandwagon. Inb4 we already know what insults are, let's move on. Yeah, let's debate another 20 pages because you're too bored to actually try and make a proper discussion without fucking shit up, almost nothing is granted in a debate. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: Nobody wants to answer this, everything is granted for these people. If people say it's bad, it must mean it is, that's called the bandwagon. Inb4 we already know what insults are, let's move on. Yeah, let's debate another 20 pages because you're too bored to actually try and make a proper discussion without fucking shit up, almost nothing is granted in a debate. I hope this could help. Definition of insult No, thank you. |
| I like anime. |
Pat_To_Do-List said: Sorry, but that's a dictionary definition, not a definition in use. The dictionary gives us a synonym in which the word "insult" could be replace in the same sentence to mean the same (or similar) thing. An in-use definition shows how the word "insult" used in different sentences can be translated without using the word itself or any of its synonyms.I hope this could help. Definition of insult No, thank you. So what we're interested in is what exactly people must do for it to count as an insult. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
elite-sama said: Sorry, but that's a dictionary definition, not a definition in use. The dictionary gives us a synonym in which the word "insult" could be replace in the same sentence to mean the same (or similar) thing. An in-use definition shows how the word "insult" used in different sentences can be translated without using the word itself or any of its synonyms. So what we're interested in is what exactly people must do for it to count as an insult. I believe the answer is there. "Speak to or treat with disrespect or scornful abuse." "A disrespectful or scornfully abusive remark or act." " |
| I like anime. |
Pat_To_Do-List said: Okay. So, this:elite-sama said: Sorry, but that's a dictionary definition, not a definition in use. The dictionary gives us a synonym in which the word "insult" could be replace in the same sentence to mean the same (or similar) thing. An in-use definition shows how the word "insult" used in different sentences can be translated without using the word itself or any of its synonyms. So what we're interested in is what exactly people must do for it to count as an insult. I believe the answer is there. "Speak to or treat with disrespect or scornful abuse." "A disrespectful or scornfully abusive remark or act." " "You are absolutely right." Did I just make a disrespectful or scornful remark? And how would you know what my intent was? |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| The proper solution. Is to just grow thicker skin. I realize we may have some younger users that aren't quite prepared to deal with bashing. However, it's going to happen, nothing we can do about it. Are the forums 18+ years or no? |
elite-sama said: Okay. So, this: "You are absolutely right." Did I just make a disrespectful or scornful remark? And how would you know what my intent was? No, you did not. Do not worry. So far, I did not know what your intention was. Sorry. Aerea said: The proper solution. Is to just grow thicker skin. I realize we may have some younger users that aren't quite prepared to deal with bashing. However, it's going to happen, nothing we can do about it. Are the forums 18+ years or no? Unfortunately, not all users can "grow a thicker skin." Mod Edit: Please do not double post. |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 12:42 AM
| I like anime. |
| I don't really know how this site works, but I've "insulted" people many times and I've not even got a warning, so I don't really understand it. LOL at you bannable guys btw |
I luv u |
| Thread cleaning to come done. Once my eyes stop bleeding. Please avoid circular arguments, re-hashing the same arguments multiple times, and discussing the philosophy of insults. I don't want to have to clean more of this after this post. Let's try to make new posts after this one constructive rather than abstract, and focus on concrete suggestions or questions. For example, you could try to actually structure a specific enforcement policy (like a set of guidelines) which might include which words are considered insults and how offenses should be moderated. Red_Keys was the closest, as I recall, to beginning to actually propose something like this. We'll try to post something soon explaining how we actually moderate things now (since only Tallon really seemed to have an idea of what we do) - read: mod post - and I think we may try to post some more opinion posts as well. |
KinetaOct 31, 2013 1:29 AM
Kineta said: Please avoid circular arguments, re-hashing the same arguments multiple times, and discussing the philosophy of insults. I don't want to have to clean more of this after this post. Let's try to make new posts after this one constructive rather than abstract, and focus on concrete suggestions or questions. It is known that hot topics that focus on something negative over positive, or are requesting/suggesting a bigger change become circular after a certain amount of posts. At start, people might express their own opinions, but when someone will disagree, the disagreement will just go round and round in circles. It is not something new to any forum board in general, so I wouldn't expect much. The only way to prevent something like that is to take action against those who are doing it, but if that will take place, the whole discussion will just disappear and no one will respond on the topic anymore, assuming they have already shared their opinion on the matter earlier in the thread. |
SubbedOct 30, 2013 5:36 AM
| @Kineta How the heck do you want to change something if you don't even know what you're changing? Seriously now, we are talking in abstract because everybody refrains from being clear about their points of view, when you feel that everything is granted, that's when everything is actually pretty ambiguous. Just pick up what you think is relevant out of this thread and try to pander for the majority, think of making a poll, and maybe yeah, explain how you moderate, even if it's not hard to imagine, I knew all that Tallon said, I was talking about leniency rather than method. And Pat, that could have been sarcastic, because of the use of "absolutely". To me it sounded like somebody was mocking you for your mediocre response, which is pretty rude and abusive as it implies many things. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| I think in the end, this thread is all about MAL users expressing their opinion about the forum policy on insults, whether it's constructive & credible or not. And I think the MAL staff just need to read those opinions & sum it up themself. Because there is no way to conclude something with this kind of discussion. |
| I like anime. |
| Cleaned some posts about a thread of discussion that is no longer on topic. Noob, it's obvious that everyone trying to describe what an insult is in an abstract manner is not getting us anywhere. I know you find the discussion interesting, but drowning the thread in these posts makes it difficult for the moderators to pick out what is relevant amid the pages and pages of abstract discussion. Instead of trying to go: Definition of Insult --> Define Moderation I think it's better to go the other way: Define Moderation --> Implies the user's definition of insult. This focuses the debate on what we should do about insults rather than what are insults, which we can effectively debate ad infinitum because - as you previously said, I believe - this often has a lot to do with our culture, upbringing and environment. What one defines as an insult personally and what one feels should be done about insults in the community can also be separate things (me vs. the collective). |
| There are places on the internet where you can go to say whatever you want about anyone. Mal is not the place for it. Some of the thing that are said on mal make me wonder whether the users would have the audacity to say it in person. Perhaps, I am just too nice a person that I would never insult you, in person or online. Personally, I think there are mature ways to make point without insults. Mal is a diverse website, with people hailing from many places around the world and from all different backgrounds. It is for that reason, that it is easy to make mistakes about insults. Therefore, I am of firm belief that insults should not be allowed on mal. People debate professionally all the time and they can do it without insults. First, in a competitive competition it is not allowed and second, is that they can come up with ways to use evidence to back their decisions instead of saying, “Are you stupid?” Mal users say time and time again that they are mature enough to have debates about sensitive issues. If there is the maturity, there can be higher levels of discussion because you will be able to communicate and listen without jumping to insults. I see many interesting comments in this topic that I will respond to. There are a lot of interesting posts about how words do not mean anything and that it is foolish for people to be so bothered by that. That opinion is unfortunately incorrect. The truth is that when we talk to people verbally, conversation is lost and it is far easier to brush things off. On the other hand, we are not having a conversation we are using written word. Written word has a very different connotation then spoken word. Firstly, that things that are posted on the internet are available for everyone to see. Second, there is always a record of everything typed on the internet. Finally, written words are harder to process, because one can continue to read them repeatedly and still feel the same way about them that they did the first time they read them. Similarly, if you break up with someone by letter it is harder and more depressing than simply telling him or her because they can go back and read it again. Therefore, I stand by my opinion that written words can be just as powerful and painful as spoken words. Insults are not common sense to look at. A moderator has to read them and make a judgment usually after the fact. Therefore, the context or the nuances are lost at that point. The original mood that you might have written it in is lost. Now it is up to the moderator to look at your post and try to objectively tell who is saying what and how they feel about it. That is what makes it hard. It would be far easier to just not insult each other. Should people be banned for trying to silence trolls? It is better for users to leave the moderating to the moderators and just report it, rather than take moderation into their own hands. It is also not the community’s opinion who deserves or does not deserve to post in a topic. Therefore, you should just let them post onward and someone will come by and clean it up later. This paragraph will act then as a summary. I stand at firm belief that insults and threats online should be handled swiftly. That written words are just a harmful as spoken words. The difference between a joking insult and a serious insult is hard to decipher after the fact. Finally, that in a mature discussion one does not and should not result to insults to make their points known. |
 Where there is no imagination there is no horror. || Arthur Conan Doyle || Happy Halloween! |
| I honestly hope that these two posts, Kineta and Suzune-chan, are here to stand forever, and not repeat over multiple times. The reason behind that is that the Support section is the last section where general philosophy would be wanted - this section should be purely objective. Seeing what the general discussion on this topic wanted to be like, and what it now turned into because of obvious reasons, I highly doubt the Support section would be the place to have it. Keeping that aside and keeping on-topic, I have shared my opinion on the matter and still stand with it. It is surprising enough for MAL to even allow such a free atmosphere. As a lurker of multiple forum boards around, I can safely say that the MAL forums are one of the most free/open in sense of what's allowed to say/is not punished and what is/isn't. All in all, I wouldn't change a thing about it. The forums appear to have shaped up in their own style through time, which is only natural. As for whether insults should be ban-able or not, I have already shared my opinion on it, while keeping the general MAL actions up until now in account. It is all whether what the user meant by them - if he/she wnated to input something negative by using them, they should be handled with, if not, they should be left as they are, IMHO. However, if a Mod would find himself/herself unable to determine whether it is a negative insult or not, the post should still be removed, since insults aren't really pleasant and wanted in the first place. |
SubbedOct 30, 2013 12:44 PM
| I have been very active in forums for years, and have seen the two sides of the coin. There is the kind of forum where insults are looked after so thoroughly that they are censored in the act. Typically, by using some word filter tool I don't know about. And there is the kind of forum where even moderators take part into cursing and harassing, many times. I don't believe that either extreme is healthy for the model of community that MAL has been trying to build for years -at least for the years I have been active at the site. Both apply much better for niche communities and on the contrary this forum is large, it has a variety of ages and forms of expression; the dynamics among the users are very different, what a certain user A perceives as a personal attack or harassment can be part of the dynamics of the other user B who sees these expressions as normal... this can't be fixed by banning or attending to personal complaints, because these kinds of events will happen again and again. So the solution is either making a very clear rule about this thing, one that is categorical in its application and doesn't leave a room for misinterpretations, or on the other hand, leaving a room for self-regulation: if user B doesn't want to create an actual conflict with user A, the situation will come to an understanding point alone. These are the two solutions I can think of, and to be honest I'm finer with the second, not because I am against mod policy, but because this is a specially difficult topic to deal with and it can't be solved with absolutes. There are two affected sides in each moment that have to be taken into account. So in the criterion of user A there is a punishable offense and according to user B he/she didn't do anything wrong. Making a decision in this sense is the same as picking a side. Maybe there are alternative ways, like trying to reach a point of agreement between these two users before the choice is made. Including specific words and expressions as bannable insults? Yeah, maybe... but I don't say "fuck you" in the same way to my long-time online friend than to the newest user on board. |
jal90Oct 30, 2013 1:02 PM
Insults will happen regardless because people get to touchy with their feelings when having a serious discussion. I admit, I get pissed when I'm having a serious discussion with someone, but I'm not the type of person to go on a full fledged rant of insults. There are many on MAL who are the type to rant and insult when upset. What I think you moderators are trying to do is stop someone from expressing their feelings, and its just not gonna happen. That's all users do anyway. Type how they feel. Sometimes, insults are used to express how we feel about a opinion of another person. Not often in debates are insults the first thing to come out from beginning of a argument. It gradually leads to insulting one another. EX: What you Mods want a person to say when they are angry "OMG dude, there is no way that is right, I think you are definitely wrong about that" What a person actually feel like and want to say "OMFG dude, you are so dumb. No you are wrong." If you want to stop insults from occurring than you need to focus on the provocative context used in someone post, and stop it right before you see it getting out of hand. We all know too much provoking from both parties will lead to a flame war. Example: Person A: Actually I believe God exist because..... Person B: How can God exist.....your religion is flawed because..... Person A: Why question my fate.....all you atheist are..... (insulting person B) Mod comes in and boom. Argument should be shutdown right then and there. |
| Schools out, No job at moment, STILL hello MAL Eh..I will try to be online |
Kineta said: This focuses the debate on what we should do about insults rather than what are insults I felt like yelling out loud ''Someone gets it! Finally!" - but then I realized it was Kineta, and it shouldn't surprise me. I think it's important to discuss when exactly these kinds of matter should be brought up to the mods. Not every single instance can be spotted by them so it's (partially) up to the users to let them know when some people's words are getting out of hand. This would depend on the user's opinion so we can't do much about it, but we could try to ask them to read the mood to reduce the number of possible false alarms. --------------------------------- In regards to the simple use of words that most consider insult (ignoring whatever intent the person might have): The use of 'offensive' words should be frowned upon but not punished (regardless of my opinion on the matter). At the same time, nobody wants to read entire pages filled with insults and curses, so there is a limit to be reached before it needs to be cleaned. This regretfully can't be generalized and must be left up to the mods' judgement. --------------------------------- If the intent of the person is negative, if his/her aim is to hurt or annoy someone else through his words, then it's pretty obvious that a mod has to intervene. The intent itself is something that the mod has to figure out themselves, another thing that can't be generalized. A person who aims to harrass another through words should given a warning if it happened for the first time because it's possible that said individual had some personal troubles that pushed him/her over the edge, enough to take his/her frustations on someone else. It isn't the best excuse, but it is an excuse nonetheless. The relation between the users has to be taken into account as well, but that is left up to the mods' judgement again. For someone who acts indiscriminately and regularly, it's only natural that the mods would want that person out of the forums, and regretfully it can only be done through ban. Baning should be used as the last possible solution because it not only bans people from the forum but the website itself. There's more to MAL than the forums and it seems excessive to prevent them from using MAL's other features just some users got offended. --------------------------------- Basically, very little can be genralized and the bulk of it is left to the mod's judgement which can't be completely impartial. |
"Rejoice! We are humans— we are the most talented people! Precisely because we were born without any ability— we can achieve anything— this is the will of the weakest race!" – Sora, ‘No game No life Vol.01’ |
| I'm amazed and annoyed at the same time on how you guys suddenly started speaking in a concise manner when two mods asked you to do so but you don't want to listen to me when I tell you to do the same. Overall, I agree with all that's been written after my husbando's post (Kineta I mean, his post included), and what I mean is that we've been abstract because we couldn't be concise until somebody would tell them to write that way. Suzune, the thing is, you are too much of a nice person, and that's not a bad thing, I just wanted to say that I can't really understand how people feel when being insulted on the Internet because I never felt anything when I was being insulted. But the problem is, we were differentiating between reality and the Internet. In my opinion, or at least from the observations on how people change from reality to Internet, people expect for shitfests to happen, people want insults to be there, it's weird, but it's because of this liberty that we're on the Internet, but without rules it would get repetitive, that's why bans themselves are "fun" in their own way, like, running away from the "authority", maybe this doesn't make much sense to you, but I guess you get my drift. TL;DR Anonymity pretty much kills the real person, there are little examples of people that stay the same both RL and Internet. I completely agree that the intention is what we should look at. And indirect insults really shouldn't be bannable. In the end, I rarely use insults, I never say "You are retarded", I'd rather insult their argument. And this is one of the times we get to agree with each other without many problems, hehehehehe, mark my words, this is one of the times you should cherish, as unimportant as they may be, this is a rarity of the MAL forums. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Kineta said: These two are exactly the same. You need to have a sense of what the goals of moderation are to be able to define the rules of insult, and vice versa. The only difference that you've limited one 'direction' of problem-solving, such that since bottom-up is off limits, we are forced to conceive this from the top. And what this means is that, since all definitions of things can only merely be "implied" (e.g. insult, spam, chat, etc.), we are forced to define with enough specificity the very goal of moderation which comprises all these subjects, infinitely complicating the problem.Instead of trying to go: Definition of Insult --> Define Moderation I think it's better to go the other way: Define Moderation --> Implies the user's definition of insult. As Suzune-chan says, "Insults are not common sense to look at." What we derive from this is that insults and their intent can often be vague or indirect, and often non-insults could masquerade as insults to the uninformed. We have therefore two options moving forward: 1. Allow the moderator to make a subjective judgement on what crosses the line. This means that, since while the moderator might be dedicated to their responsibilities to the forum, they are not expert linguistic analysts, it wouldn't be surprising that they make mistakes. 2. Describe the rules which make up an offensive "insult" such that any statement could be compared to it by anyone, which limits the possibilities for ambiguity. It is unfortunate that philosophy makes your eyes hurt, since the abstract bears the foundation of being constructive. You solve a problem by prescribing the general rules in which it can be solved rather than describing every single instance that the problem can arise. Immahnoob says, "I completely agree that the intention is what we should look at. And indirect insults really shouldn't be bannable." But what entails an "indirect insult"? If we leave it up to people, individually, to decide what is and is not indirect, then this suggestion isn't very helpful. For what then is the purpose of this thread? However, we can define a "direct" insult, for example, that it is in the form of "You are... (something usually considered negative)." So now, a person only has to arbitrate what counts as "usually considered negative" as opposed to what is an "indirect insult". If the premise here is that we should leave nothing defined because the mods desire full responsibility for arbitration such that the rules are arbitrarily vague, then I have nothing further to add -- I cannot imagine what this thread, this user-mod "conversation" can be for since there are no details to discuss. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| The idea that calling someone "stupid" is now considered an offense that warrants a ban is kind of ridiculous. I'll say this as politely as I can; this thread and the idea of this thread seems to be catered to people who, for whatever reason, are not able to accept the fact that there are rude people that you will encounter in life. Whether it's on the Internet or in person. These people getting upset when someone calls them stupid just tells me that they have issues that they need to work out because they're clearly not that emotionally stable if such a statement destroys their life. I've used several forums over the last several years of owning a computer with Internet access, and I've met all types of people, some I considered to be the biggest scumbags I've ever met in my life. I've been insulted dozens of times and some of it was quite hurtful and unwarranted, I've had my feelings hurt before. But that's just a part of life, unfortunately life isn't always as pleasant as we'd like it to be, not as long as people will act the way they do out of human nature. As for what to actually do about insults? Honestly, there isn't much you can do. Should you report someone for going so far as to say "I'm going to find you and kill you and your whole family"? Absolutely, that is threatening and should be dealt with. But in a situation like "Wow, you're kind of stupid"? Not really. It's an insult but it shouldn't ruin your life. There is the issue of context of course, but regardless, that's not something worth reporting someone over. Why would you ever feel the need to report to a mod about something like that? It's like going up to your parents or teacher every time some kid/your sibling called you stupid. Eventually, that will only get you so far, and it's best to just deal with it yourself. I'm not saying you should go on a white knighting crusade about it like some people do, but you can either ask or realize why they said that, or simply just ignore it. There are rude people everywhere; some you meet just by walking the street near your home. Are you going to call the police whenever someone tells you to get out of their way? Are you going to report to the police if some idiot stepped on your new white sneakers without apologizing for it? Are you going to call the police when someone takes the parking spot you were just about to take first at the mall? The idea of this thread tells me that we're now going for a forced PG experience here on MAL. Aka "Be nice and play nice!" "Mooooooooooooooooooooood, this user just called me a butthead!" It comes off as really sheltered and ridiculous. There is certainly a line to cross when someone is saying something insulting to someone, when that line is crossed, it can be hurtful. But all of a sudden being called stupid is hurtful and world destroying for some? tl;dr. I'm all for a pleasant forum atmosphere. But human nature dictates that there will always be people who aren't really all that nice. I'm certainly no saint myself, not by a long shot. But unless that line has been crossed, it's better to just ignore that person(or even ask why they feel that way about something you said. There's always a chance that you did in fact say something kind of stupid/silly/ridiculous/illogical/something totally asinine etc.) instead of demanding that an entire forum community must change to suit their personal ideal world. Also, a community made up of well informed, logical users who's debates can be mature, on-topic and pleasant is a nice idea. But the thing is, this is MAL. This site is used by tweens/teens/College age students and even some grown men and women, but the majority are the former. And since the majority are of those age groups, it's kind of unrealistic to expect that much maturity. |
HiasOct 30, 2013 10:20 PM
 |
| Let me explain what an indirect insult means for me, I sometimes use certain "comparisons" like "Only retards do that." or instead of saying "they are" you can say "people act like". Meh, I don't even remember what came to my mind when I wrote that, I can always edit it out if it doesn't really make sense. Mod Edit: Removed unnecessary remark. |
KinetaNov 8, 2013 10:30 AM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| As I've said before, the Internet lacks physical contact and real life information about you, because of that, insults are blind, anonymity makes people act differently than they usually do, and because of that anonymity, any type of subject can be spoken of without actual societal consequences. Because everything on the Internet has less impact on the individual because of certain barriers, the rules can't be similar to reality, and the bar should be raised on what truly is harmful to the individual. Mod Edit: Removed replies to deleted post(s). |
KinetaNov 8, 2013 10:27 AM
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| If you can't take criticism, you shouldn't even be on the internet in the first place. |
| my avatar is the bus driver from Rosario + Vampire |
| A difference of opinion is not an insult, it's as simple as attacking the post not the poster, really 14+ pages of posts for this? |
| Everybody has their own way of looking at this problem, but at the end of the day every proposition is worthless if the ones running the place don't approve of it. That's why we need to know their stand on this so we have a starting point, so we know what has a chance of being considered in the first place. The purpose of the policy (all of them actually) is to try and control people's behaviour, by encouraging or punishing certain actions, the mods can try to make MAL into what they want it to be. It's not worth calling it brainwashing or training, nor is it as succesfull, but I that's a way of seeing it. That's why we need word from them, so we can know: what do they want the MAL community to be? Regardless of how impossible it may be, or how absurd it can appear to us, we need to know precisely what do the mods expect from us in terms of behaviour, even if they themselves know we wouldn't accept it. Or else arguments like Adram's and Immahnoob's will continue. Mod Edit: Removed quoted of deleted post and one-line reply. |
KinetaNov 8, 2013 10:25 AM
"Rejoice! We are humans— we are the most talented people! Precisely because we were born without any ability— we can achieve anything— this is the will of the weakest race!" – Sora, ‘No game No life Vol.01’ |
| You should NOT be banned for insulting. Actually, you should. But not for 1 month. Mod Edit: Removed moderator specific discussion. Mod Edit 2: Removed edited-in note about "mod censorship". Please read the OP. |
KinetaNov 8, 2013 10:24 AM
 |
| This post will explain how insults are currently handled by the moderating team and will not include my own opinion on the thread (which I hope to post later). I apologise that it took a number of days for this post. General Rule Violation Policy Full-text tl;dr How does MAL define insults? An insult is a derogatory remark that labels an individual or group of users. When used in a debate, an insult dismisses the arguments of the target user(s) and discourages them from participating further. Name-calling is not productive and typically derails the topic by turning the discussion to the credibility of the user(s). It never convinces the other party and often provokes a similar reaction from other posters. The resulting commotion is ineffective for the offender, offensive for the target, distracting for spectators, and tiring for moderators. When not used in a debate (e.g. "what an idiotic thread, OP"), then its purpose is one or more of: baiting, flaming, harassment, trolling - all of which are rule violations in their own right. Full text tl;dr Moderation of insults I think this effectively covers the mod portion of my post in this thread. I would like to reply to various posts in this thread as well, but I will do this more in my own capacity than as an official post. Please remember: Kineta said: The purpose here is not to resolve an event of the past that only you and your warning/banning moderator are aware of; these discussions should always be taken to private messages. Instead, the purpose is to discuss how insults are currently moderated and how this might be changed in the future. @elite-sama: |
| Okay, first of all, I'm going to suggest a rule of 3's on warnings. 3 warnings before your first ban. Subsequent bans can be trimmed back to 1, if you guys can keep track of that. Repeat offenders are gonna be repeat offenders, but first timers deserve slack. And, a shorter expiration of warnings (or just make warning expiration exist). Using my case here, I apparently got a ban from "the Friday thing" because I had a warning sitting on me one month prior, which I'd already forgotten by that point (hence why I had to have it pointed out). My fault or not for remembering, but that's just... weird. In a good example of this: A user gets warned, cleans up their posting habits (avoiding insulting for a month), and then insults someone again a month later. That's 2 separate cases, not a "streak of aggressive posting". Clean posting for a month (or however long you set expiration times) is good enough I'd say. Or maybe I'm just supporting myself. "Indirect insults are taken in context; e.g. "anyone who thinks that is a dumbass"." Take this off as counting as an insult. That's just rife with possibility for anyone to say, and then get warned/banned. I mean, you could basically take a look at the gun threads, and you'll see that everywhere. Have fun cleaning up an entire thread's worth of users.. "Non-obviously derogatory statements are not insults as long as they don't become obviously offensive." >Everyone here is a giant cream cheese cake because they're just oh-so tangy and moist~ So in effect, we just gotta be subtle about it, following the "sarcasm" philosophy explained earlier. Well, I think that's all I got for suggestions. Someone else can go reformulate their entire system, I'm down for just those changes. |
MellowJelloNov 4, 2013 10:19 PM
| I think to a certain extent it should be allowed. When I insult people I hardly ever mean it. It's all in good fun, but I guess it's hard to tell over the interweb. Frankly, I didn't even know it wasn't allowed until I called some nice fellow an asshole and I got a warning. |
More topics from this board
» how to see private messages from deleted accounts?Eggyy - Today |
5 |
by Eggyy
»»
7 minutes ago |
|
» Who are the new owners of MAL, and is MAL's future in any doubt?_cjessop19_ - Today |
6 |
by ACasualViewer
»»
3 hours ago |
|
» How to disable the Mai recommendation bot thingRhys2753 - Mar 31 |
34 |
by Absurdo_N
»»
Today, 3:26 AM |
|
» Mark all as read looks weird FIXEDScaryOwl - Yesterday |
7 |
by Serafos
»»
Today, 1:43 AM |
|
» Badge suddenly appeared on my profileConde_Mohr - Yesterday |
2 |
by Shishio-kun
»»
Yesterday, 8:50 PM |