New Policy Discussion - **NO** Politics (& maybe Religion) in Sigs

Discussion in 'Communications' started by MrEmh, Aug 11, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
  1. DarthTunick SfC Commish on an "All-Star" break

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Nov 26, 2000
    star 10
  2. Qui Gon Jim23 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 11, 2002
    star 5
    I don't like other people's political and religious views thrust upon me

    How is placing a statement in a sig thrusting anything upon anyone? These statements oftentimes can give valuable insight into the person whose post you're reading, either positve or negative. But in no way are you being forced to read or agree with the statement that is being made. If you go by that standard, then you can't watch AotC because some of the characters blatanty advocate democracy.
  3. HawkNC Former RSA: Oceania

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 2001
    star 6
    Just adding my $0.02:


    I don't agree with banning political and religious statements in signatures one little bit. I should have the right to express my pride in my religion and political beliefs. Regardless of whether or not this board was initially a Star Wars based board, it is no longer that. It encompasses political and religious debates in the Senate, cultural discussions in the Amphitheatre and a bit of completely irrelevant fun in YJCC. If we are allowed to discuss such things, we should be allowed to say as much in our signature. Sigs are meant to be an expression of us, a unique piece that identifies who we are. If a large part of our identity involves religious or political issues, we should be allowed to express that. Whilst I don't agree with letting people say things like "CHRISTIANITY SUCKS", removing all political and religious statements from signatures is censorship, plain and simple.
  4. EmpressPalpatine Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Mar 31, 2001
    star 4
    What upset me most on this issue was the fact that this seemed to be a hasty decision, brought on in part by the recent controversy involving Vaderbait's sig, the fact, when it was announced, no one on the AC knew about this, and the fact that when members attempted to question, and debate the issue, the threads kept getting locked. I'm glad to see this thread was re-opened, and I'm hoping we have some clarification from the Administration ( read: NathanDahlin )on this issue. THe fact that is happened so soon after the Vaderbait situation, plus the fact it was posted late on a Sunday night, a traditional slow time here on the boards, concerns me even more. I'd like to know how much discussion went into this issue, and exactly what brought this about.

    And I wish SotS well on his "leave of absense". He certainly has earned it.
  5. Darth_AYBABTU Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 8, 2001
    star 6

    The fervor with which the AC was ignored on this issue is appalling. It's true, people. The Advisory Council is a paper tiger.

    And my sig is not political in nature. It is a simple statement of fact.

    AYBABTU?

  6. DarthPhelps Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 31, 2002
    star 5
    Wow. I go camping over the weekend and look what happens at the JC forums. :eek:

    I hope my sig isn't bannable. ;)

    I've had the 2Kings line in there for 2-3 weeks and I'm quite fond of it. It is not flame any current religious thought, as far as I know.
  7. UK Sullustian Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 1998
    star 4
    Do you know, In Britain you can tell what way your MP votes on issues.

    Can't we do the same here?

    I mean, "The Administration" decided this.. but who actually supported it? who championed this cause?

    If we knew that, we could focus our energies on discussing with the people who believe this is the right choice, rather then the "rubberstampers" or others who didn't care.

    Maybe the JC has outgrown the need for collective responsibilty?

    UKS
  8. DarthNut Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 1, 1999
    star 6
    Right now I'd just like to discuss my utter discontempt with this decision, and the mods right now in general. As said before, this is cleary taking the easy way out! I mean, handling it on a situation basis would be a lot fairer to all invloved, not just blanketing the entire situation with one "easy" solution.

    [face_plain] DarthNut,
    the nuttiest guy around.
  9. ElfStar Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 24, 2001
    star 4
    I disagree with this new policy. As others have already noted, there is no argument for banning political sigs that can't be used to ban any other type of discussion.
  10. Yodave27 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2001
    star 4
    Well, this decission makes NO sense. Political and religious beliefs are OPINIONS. Are you goona start banning people who post their religious or political beliefs in the Senate? Or how about the person who likes AOTC and says so in the AOTC forum, are we going to ban him(or her) for stating their opinions?

    [face_shakingheadindisgust]
  11. Darth_AYBABTU Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 8, 2001
    star 6

    This whole thing reminds me of this story -- Kid's 2-inch gun seized.

    In that case, the laziness and lack of cognitive abilities of the staff at LAX prompted them to confiscate a two inch long plastic toy accessory for an action figure because it just so happened to look like a gun -- a two inch plastic gun. If teeny tiny toy guns are outlawed, only teeny tiny outlaws will have teeny tiny guns.

    That is precisely what is happening here. There is a sheer lack of interest on the part of the Administration in actually exerting some effort to see that reason and tact are used in the enforcement of policy. They see a situation where they might actually need to one day make a judgement call, so they take the easy way out and ban whatever it was that might compel them to think. To borrow a phrase from another member here...

    Amazing.

    AYBABTU?

  12. BYOB_Kenobi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 7, 2000
    star 5
    I don't see any good reason why political opinions should not be allowed in signatures. As a matter of fact, I can't see any good reason why alot of things aren't allowed in signatures.

    Relax.
    Lighten up.
    Get a grip.
  13. Vertical Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Apr 6, 1999
    star 6
    Clearly, this policy needs more discussion and rethinking.

    Vertical
  14. KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2001
    star 8
  15. Qui Gon Jim23 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 11, 2002
    star 5
    If AYBABTU's statement is correct, and the AC was ignored on such a far-reaching issue, then this is truly disturbing.

    It would seem that in the very least there should be full disclosure of the arguments for and against this issue in a forum accessible to the membership in it's entirety. I for one might be satisfied with a satisfactory explanation from the administration rather than another

    They have the potential to cause arguments and offence unnecessarily. This has already happened, and that is why this rule has been brought in.

    This could be said of 90% of the posts on the JC.

    Secondly, I find it unsettling to have heard the statement more than once that "this is a Star Wars message board... Therefore, they should not have other people's political views, which they may find offensive, thrust upon them." The most prominent reason that I registered with these boards was that this was a community whose binding factor was the love of Star Wars, not it's only attribute.

    The road that has been chosen is a slippery slope which -- at the risk of adding Drama -- can only serve to facilitate the removal of diversity within the JC.

  16. BYOB_Kenobi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 7, 2000
    star 5
    Hmm... Kinda makes you think the people that run this place don't particularly like diversity.
  17. Dan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 1999
    star 6
    I can accept the fact that perhaps the admins made an error in judgement, or that this decision was made hastily, or that they have a differing opinion from me. It happens, as they are but human. But to close the threads that the AC made on the topic is unacceptable. To shut down what is supposed to be the voice and representation of the regular users is, simply put, very stupid.
  18. Yodave27 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2001
    star 4
    The fervor with which the AC was ignored on this issue is appalling. It's true, people. The Advisory Council is a paper tiger.


    If you're not gonna listen to their suggestions, what's the point of having it?
  19. legacyAccount Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    May 22, 2012
    assuming this policy is kept, the following are mods who need to change their sigs:

    Carter-TFN
    "You have to be the change you want to see in the world" - Gandhi
    (political)

    jedimasterED
    May those who love us love us.
    Those who don't, may God turn their hearts.
    And if He cannot turn their hearts,
    may He turn their ankles...
    so we may know them by their limping!
    (religious)

    Shara82
    It takes billions of years to create a human being and only a few seconds to die.
    (religious)

    Kessel Runner
    Official Liberal Champion of the JC
    Chairman, Multi-Ethnic Defense League
    (political)




    none of these are offensive, but they all make a statement. so if you're going to ban users for making a political or religious statement, then these sigs need to change, or these mods demoted.

    now, if you're just against offensive sigs, and not policial/reigious ones, then these are fine. but that's not the policy that was just put into place.
  20. Jedi Greg Maddux Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 3, 1999
    star 6
    I still fail to see the purpose of limiting something so trivial as a signature. Do people read them? Not very often. Do people care? Not really.

    I'm surprised you didn't get rid of the feature entirely instead of appeasing to the sensitive folk. The way I see it, as long as a signature isn't blatantly offensive, it should be A-OK.
  21. Spike_Spiegal Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Mar 11, 2002
    star 5
    I agree with Dan on this issue.
  22. Jeff 42 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 14, 1998
    star 5
    "But to close the threads that the AC made on the topic is unacceptable. To shut down what is supposed to be the voice and representation of the regular users is, simply put, very stupid."

    The AC thread was not closed. It's just that the AC was never consulted before this policy was announced.
  23. JediJeffro Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 23, 2001
    star 5
    Dan, AYBABTU, and MrEmh have said it best. And what an odd grouping that is. ;)
  24. Arwen_Evenstar Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2000
    star 4
    So we can't have political sigs b/c the Senate is the designated forum for politics? Would it then follow that we can't put SW references in our sigs b/c we have specific SW forums? Or maybe we can't put quotes from movies/books/plays/songs b/c those topics belong in the Amphitheatre?

    I completely disagree with this decision! I understand that this is not a democracy, but regular users should still be able to expect fair and reasonable decisions from the administration. Putting a blanket-ban on sigs is just ridiculous, IMHO [face_plain]
  25. Jedi Greg Maddux Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 3, 1999
    star 6
    The AC is on its last legs, unfortunately. What was to be a promising link between the Mod Squad and the members has turned out to be a place for members to think that they're actually represented.

    The distance between members and the mods can almost be measured with light-years. This place started out on equal ground for both, where they got along together fairly well and the mods were seen as simple enforcers when necessary.

    Over the past few months, this rift has increased, and you can tell there's some aura surrounding some of the mods, and they spend time with themselves more than the members, trying to dictate new policies, pull stunts behind the members' backs, and the like. The mods are meant to serve the Jedi Council forums, not to do things on a whim and make haphazard decisions.

    My confidence is shaken in the mod squad right now. If you want that confidence to be built back up, I suggest somebody should find a new way to enhance member/moderator relations. It doesn't hurt for members to be more vocal. It doesn't hurt if the mods come out of their shells and socialize with the rest of us. If a ban button scares you then you should find something else to do with your time.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.