MS Update MS Update March 15, 2006

<img src="http://www.yodajeff.com/tracy/LBT.gif">

[image=http://www.yodajeff.com/tracy/friends_littlefoot.gif]

M O D E R A T O R ~ N E W S:

* Strilo was out, travelling, from March 10 to the 13th

* gabe is out this week until monday, due to unforseen events

* malkieD2 returned from a business trip and there was much rejoicing and crying

* RebelScum77 is on reduced time the next two weeks due to being extra busy at work

* TheBoogieMan will be gone friday-sunday of this week

[image=http://www.yodajeff.com/tracy/friends_cera.gif]

R E M I N D E R S:

* Plagiarism earns a 3 month ban in FanFic. This is a very serious offense, so think seriously before committing it

* Posting with socks while banned automatically doubles your ban. Again, is that really worth it? Probably not! Don't do it (Note: this is not true for game bans, where you are allowed to post with socks)

* PMs are moderated just like posts. PMs remain private unless a user comes directly to a moderator with the text of an inappropriate PM. Then an admin verifies the PM and the writer of the PM is delt with accordingly. This includes bad words, inaproppriate pictures, sexual comments, flames... if you wouldn't post it, don't PM it!

* Borderline usernames are banned at admins descretion. Just because the word whore is tolerated in certain cases doesn't mean you can have it in your username. Rules for usernames are a bit more strict as they appear thousands of times across many forums.

* Generally, the best way to promote your own site, recuit help or users for your site is to put a link in your signature. Please remember to make sure your site follows the TOS... no porn or swear words on the link. Special exceptions may be made if you talk to your forum moderators.

[image=http://www.yodajeff.com/tracy/friends_ducky.gif]

J C ~ N E W S:

* Later today (thurs) expect to see St Patrick's Day Icons and Banners! They will remain up until saturday night or sunday morning. Enjoy!

* Lately we've been having a lot of technical issues. If you log into the JC and everything is gray and there is no banners, this is because the admins have change it to help speed up the boards. This is done when we have many broken images due to server issues. To discuss these issues, please use the If you have a technical error, log it in here. thread.

* The Big Issue of the Week: Sacred Mormon articles posted in picture form in JCC. After a lengthly comms discussion and a parallel intensive mod squad discussion, the moderating team has decided to leave the photo up. In an extremely concise summary from our head admin, "We're going to remain consistent with what we've done for years in the JCC. I can sympathize with those who feel offended in this case. On the other hand, it's no different than what's been allowed for years." The JC cannot cater to what some people find offensive, even massively offensive, as everyone is offended by something. We try as a team to be fair and moderate TOS infractions.

[image=http://www.yodajeff.com/tracy/friends_spike.gif]

F O R U M ~ N E W S:

* Fan Films has a new banner! Come check it out

* JCC banner contest still on going, contributions and comments are welcome [link=http://boards.theforce.net/your

 

Basically, the administration has decided that the TOS no longer apply in the JCC. The TOS specifically state:

Also, as a general guideline, all users here should respect one another's opinions and beliefs.

The newer version also states:

Users are expected to conduct themselves in a manner which is respectful to themselves and fellow users at all times.

What is the point of asking users to respect others' beliefs if you allow users to be so disrespectful towards others most sacred beliefs?

It is nothing less than hypocrisy, and it is a damning statement about the MS's view of what constitutes "respect".

Kimball Kinnison

EDIT: I would also ask that in the future, if an admin decides to permanently shut down a thread in Comms, that they just come out and say so, rahter than lie about it. rhonderoo's locking post in that thread stated:

The thread was never unlocked for further discussion.

 

We can still post with socks during Game bans right?

 

Kimball_Kinnison, you're misinterpreting what was said and representing it in a harsh light. What I said was that we have years of similar threads, pics, and posts that could offend anyone at anytime that are within the TOS. This was as well. This isn't new policy at all. The rules are being reiterated and have been in place for years. The decision stands and isn't radical or unusual to what's seen everyday in the JCC.

Yes. The ban we're referring to are non-game bans based on TOS infractions.

 

I'm almost positive that this is still the case. Nice update Tracy!

 

Hooray Land Before Time! Good pictures droideka! Yep yep.

Get it? Yep Yep? That is what Ducky says.

 

For all we know the Mod Squad could still be discussing the "mormon issue/underwear problem /out of all proportion/religious concern"* thing and it could eventually be brought back into the public domain after must discussion.


I'm sure you know (with you having been part of the mod squad) that these things can take time.







*delete as appropriate

 

good point, I clarified in the update

 

Sape,

The TOS have asked people for years to be respectful of others beliefs. What is the point of that if you aren't going to actually enforce that? Just because the JCC has become more and more lax about asking for respect doesn't make it right or proper to allow such disrespect.

How is it unreasonable to ask the mods to actually enforce the TOS? Is it unreasonable to ask that a picture that is found to be highly offensive to users on these boards (including quite a few non-Mormons who posted in the Comms thread) to be edited out?

Kimball Kinnison

 

Kimball_Kinnison, highly offensive to a select few which is normal. This time those select few went to Comms and posted vehemently. I can sympathize with how you feel. I've seen countless Jesus pics, knock knock Jesus pics, etc.... that have been allowed for years. It was within the TOS. Yes, a few users had problems with it. We cannot make all the people happy all the time. In my response to you and in the MS, I based it upon years of standing precedence and evidence. No offense to you, but I don't see you as a past mod who championed this cause with such vigor until it hit close to home about Mormonism. And then it all broke loose. In other words, where's the precedence for your argument on the admistrative side supporting the view that appears to you to be a blatant attack and disrespect to all Mormons and people of faith? I'm sorry, but that's how I feel. I'm not saying I like it. But I am saying the ruling on this is final and it was really a black and white case.

 

KK is not misrepresenting anything. It seems to me that you are basically saying, "we have no desire to fix an obvious problem because similar inappropriate threads have been allowed to continue on for years. Why should we do something about it now?"

Well IMO that's a horrible excuse for not correcting an obvious problem. As I said in my previous thread, this is the biggest reason for why I, and I'm sure many others, feel unwelcome in the JCC. If you can't respect the most sacred beliefs of your members to even do a simple thing like remove some pictures of sacred religious clothing, how can any of your members feel anything but unwelcome in your forum? As KK said, what's next, the posting of sacred texts from temples? Also, as I said before, this applies to all religions and not just the LDS church.

You also use the excuse that you've seen offensive pictures of Jesus before and they were allowed to stay? Why is that? If you knew that many members of the forum finds inappropriate pictures of Jesus offensive, why allow them to be posted?

 

To be honest I never posted in the thread and if I had I would have just found the garments to be humerous becuase I did not know (Until the comms thread) that the garments were sacred. I would have thought they were posted because of a stereotype that all mormons wear this style underwear (Though I may be thinking of Amish people as I write this)


How many mods would know what is offensive to each of the plethora of religions in this world?????


IMO the post (which I have now read) was no more than typical JCC joshing and was in no way against the TOS.

 

Again, to Vezner and Kimball, sorry this happened and it was offensive to you. As a mod, it's cut and dry. And I made that decision with complete sympathy. I've been there myself. We all have taken offense to something. If this occurred in the Senate, okay. If this occurred on a strictly religious Mormon and Christian messageboard, okay. There's a strong case for it being highly offensive and inappropriate. This being posted in the JCC is fine even if I don't think it was in the best taste. Sorry this time it happened to you.

 

The point is even though the mods didn't know that they were sacred when the pictures were posted, they certainly do know now. Yet nothing has been done about the problem.

 

If somebody posted a picture of a sacred Agnosticism Top Hat, like this one, I would not be offended.

[image=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v292/NerfoNarf/AgnostiHat.jpg]

 

Please explain to me in terms of the TOS for why you feel this issue is so black and white.

 

You know, all joking aside, your post with the agnostic hat completely makes my point and I will demonstrate consistency in my ruling by allowing it to stay.

 

So, Sape, you are adding yourself to the list of people accusing me of being a hypocrite on this matter?

For years in MS I argued against the change in policy to allow religious topics in the JCC, regularly saying that they would end up being used to mock and ridicule religious beliefs. In the Senate (and you can check with quite a few Senate regulars on this), I worked for a long time to keep people respectful towards other religions. I edited and banned people for attacks on Islam, Wicca, Scientology, Catholicism, and other religions.

But of course, because it happens to be my own religion that was attacked this time, it's easier to simply dismiss me as being some sort of hypocrite.

Here's also a hint for you: In the past, I didn't have to champoion it "with such vigor" because I had direct authority to do something about it (specifically, enforce the TOS). Since I no longer have that authority, the only way to even come close to getting anything done is for me to be louder on this issue.

Kimball Kinnison

 

If you can't respect the most sacred beliefs of your members to even do a simple thing like remove some pictures of sacred religious clothing, how can any of your members feel anything but unwelcome in your forum?

Whose sacred beliefs are more important? You started a thread calling for the death penalty on someone and stated your beliefs quite clearly. I'm not going to say one way or the other if I agree with you or not, but there were people in there that were clearly offended by your stance and disagreed. What then? Why aren't we arguing that in this thread? What about the fact that a vegeatarian thread was posted and people posted pics of steaks?

Why is your belief in more important than the myriad of people that post on this forum?

 

Maybe, Richard. I think perhaps, and feel free to convince me from a JCC perspective why I'm wrong with precedence, you are outwardly appearing to me as hypocritical. You're looking at this completely from a personal and Senate standpoint. The global issue of what happened has always been there and you were never one to ever speak up like this so adamantly as you are now when it was about Mormonism. Is the agnostic hat, had it been posted in the JCC, been out of line in offense to those with strong beliefs that are non-Christian, for instance?

 

It amazes me that pics of Mormon text can be considered offensive. Can we even discuss Mormons at all?

 

Sape, once again you prove that you don't read posts before you respond.

When I was a mod, I didn't have to make a fuss or speak up significantly about such issues. I had the authority to act and so I did. That whole "actions speak louder than words" bit. Since I can't act in this case, I am left with only words.

As for the agnostic hat, do you have a complaint from anyone that it is offensive? If you do, I would say to go ahead and remove it. That's how I handled such things when I was a mod. If I got a complaint that someone was posting things that were offensive to one group or another, I removed them (unless I had a reason to believe that they were not being completely forthcoming about it being offensive, in which case I asked for more information before acting).

As I said in the other Comms thread, I haven't been asking for anyone to be banned for posting the pictures, but I have asked that the pictures themselves be removed. They may have been posted in ignorance of their offensive nature, but that is no reason to leave offensive images up.

Ask yourself this: which causes more harm to more people? If you remove the images, what harm or insult has been caused? Now, compare that with the harm and insult from leaving them up?

Kimball Kinnison

 

Regarding the thread in question, I simply stated that this was an example for a case in which I support the death penalty. Are you seriously going to tell me that my political stance on this issue is equal with people trampling on other people's sacred religious beliefs? I don't know a single person that thinks politics are sacred. IMHO there is a difference between being offended by someone toying around with sacred religious beliefs and someone being offended by a political statement. And if someone did come in to that thread and said that their religion or otherwise personal sacred beliefs dictate that the posting of comments that support the death penalty to be an extreme violation of their most sacred beliefs, I would have gladly locked my own thread. No such comments happened. All I saw were a few people that disagreed with my stance. These issues are in no way similar.

Is it too much to ask that mods at least take action in threads in which one or more members express concern about their sacred religious beliefs being trounced upon? As KK said, if you don't think they are being honest in their complaint, have them provide further reasonable clarification for why they are offended by the pictures or comments.

 

The Jesus "brb-lol" image.
The Mohammad = terrorist images.

Why is it KK that your knickers in a twist (pun intended) now ?

 

I don't know, I'm feeling pretty outraged. Oh wait, I'm not agnostic.