main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

[ToS Clarification] ROTS Forum - Social Thread

Discussion in 'Communications' started by Kavic_Toth, Jun 24, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kavic_Toth

    Kavic_Toth Manager Emeritus star 5 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Aug 9, 2002
    For one, you're attempting nothing more than derailing the thread. It was never about 'Terry Schiavo' pictures, or any other pictures. The pics (gifs, to be precise) were requested to be kept at a minimum.

    The bans, as I can tell, were directed at the responses to the Mods, which were sarcastic posts such as "Well that's ******* stupid" to their requests to tone down on the number of posts with starred out words.

    Now, did the bans help?! The thread is still totally off, and honestly, I have no idea why it's even still open.
     
  2. YTMND

    YTMND Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 22, 2004
    I think Sinister should read this,apparently it is against the rules for me to post pictures of Terri Schiavo.

    He says it was in the context of which I posted it.

    The context was in celebration of my 8,000th post,and I said Terri wants to celebrate. So I posted a GIF of the picture.

    EDIT:Sir this is not derailing of a thread,this is discussion of an issue which applies exactly to this thread. You weren't there for this part,so respectfully butt out. :)
     
  3. Quixotic-Sith

    Quixotic-Sith Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 22, 2001
    I'm not asking about ROC/TOS violations - I just wonder what the impetus is to post images of a woman who was an unfortunate victim of circumstance, who was politicized and exploited, and who to this day is still divisive for the American (and global) public.

    Why post provoking images at a Star Wars website? Many people come here to relax and have fun; why should they have to face things like that?

    I'll give you a quick for instance. This happened several years ago, back when I was just a movie forum mod. I was responsible for maintaining a fun and civil atmosphere in a forum that all too easily descending into flaming and baiting. I had come off a sixteen hour shift on the Behavioral Health Unit, and had a woman die while I was performing chest compressions (she threw a clot; there was nothing we could do). I came to the site simply because I wanted to relax and have fun. At the time, someone was borderline trolling the Basher's Sanctuary, and it fell to me to do something about it. His behavior was all within the TOS, but only just so - he was skirting the edge of what was acceptable and unacceptable. I called him on it; he was destroying the fun atmosphere just for his own kicks; just because he wanted something to do. That's shameful, even if licit under the TOS.

    I don't get why people want to do things that cause consternation and controversy at a freaking Star Wars website. I'm not asking everyone to be model posters, but I am asking them not to be buttheads and to see what they can and can't get away with. That's juvenile, and I have no problems banning people for such behavior. I've gotten flack about that in the past, but the forums are a better place as a result, so I'll do it again in the future.

    I'm not commenting on the situation at hand per se, but it is an attitude that these boards would be better off without.
     
  4. Lord_NoONE

    Lord_NoONE Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 17, 2001
    The discussion of Terri Schiavo pictures is entirely germane to the thread's premise. We're talking about when can a moderator edit out things just because they are in bad taste, even though the images do not violate the RoC/TOS. Terri Schiavo pictures, at least in my opinion, fall squarely within this discussion as they are in poor taste (Sorry YTMND) but do not violate the RoC/ToS.
     
  5. Darth_Ignant

    Darth_Ignant Jedi Grand Master star 7

    Registered:
    Oct 24, 2001
    "For one, you're attempting nothing more than derailing the thread. It was never about 'Terry Schiavo' pictures, or any other pictures. "

    Actually, this thread was started, as the title says, about how the social thread spiralled out of control. For the **** of words, to pics, to whatever else there was. And if that wasn't your intention, it should certainly be expanded to cover those things. As Sinister said this is a break down in communication. Guess what, this is the comms forum. As the pics were edited, or in fact, posts entirely deleted (never neccessary, mods, always go for the edit), they are indeed a bone of contention over rules that have seemingly changed without any public discussion.

    BTW, it should be RoC clarification, not ToS clarification.



    "Many people come here to relax and have fun; why should they have to face things like that? "

    And to some, posting those pics and seeing those pics is a way of having fun. If they're banned, fine, whatever. I don't post them, so don't care that much. Just wondering how fun is dictated.
     
  6. RebelScum77

    RebelScum77 Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Aug 3, 2003
    This has absolutely nothing do to with me having come from the calm 3NS and not understanding how the 3SA works. I was a member of the 3SA until about a year ago, so I know how it works. Beside, the RotS mods have been talking for awhile about the situation in the Social Thread. My being modded just happened to coincidence with the straw that broke the camel's back.

    About Schiavo post:

    The Rules of Conduct state that: User agrees not to post material that is knowingly false and/or defamatory, misleading, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, that otherwise violates any law, or that encourages conduct constituting a criminal offense.

    The post was in bad taste, and was meant to make fun of her. That can be considered hateful to those who sympathized with her and her family's suffering. We made a judgement call that it was inappropriate, and just one more moving gif in a page filled with too many. So it was removed. What is the big deal?

    What we are asking of people is really very simple. No one is being persecuted here, we're not out to get anyone. Nearly all the posters in that thread are friends outside of it, encourage each other to behave, because if not, the few people who won't follow the rules will be responsible for ruining the experience for everyone else.

     
  7. ApolloSmileGirl

    ApolloSmileGirl Jedi Knight star 8

    Registered:
    Jun 18, 2004
    "Nearly all the posters in that thread are friends outside of it."

    I really don't see what that has to do with anything, but if that is going to be your case than why don't you just shut the whole thread down. Because by your logic you're only hurting the peope that you find to be trouble users.
     
  8. jedi_master_ousley

    jedi_master_ousley Manager Emeritus star 8 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 14, 2002
    I think that those defending the Schiavo pics (since that is the current example) are leaving out an important detail (at least from the one that I saw): it wasn't just a picture of Schiavo, it was a picture of just her head dancing back and forth on a background of some variety. It wasn't "just a picture" of her, it was an animated .gif with the sole purpose of making fun of her situation.

    Personally, I thought it was funny. I have a very twisted sense of humor. That, however, does not mean that it is appropriate for the forums.
     
  9. Lord_NoONE

    Lord_NoONE Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 17, 2001
    But RS77, the same subjective adjudication can be leveled at almost any post in any forum. The question should not be whether someone would subjectively believe a post's content to be hateful, it's whether by the strict and objective interpretation of the RoC and the ToS something qualifies as hateful. In this particular instance, the judgment call that the MS made was entirely subjective and did not attempt to incorporate any form of objective criteria for a determination. That is unless the objective criteria is whether someone would subjectively believe a post constituted a hateful post. If that's the case then around and around on the tautological carousel we go.

    I believe that establishing some form of clear, objective criteria for interpreting the RoC would greatly assist the Mods in their efforts at control.
     
  10. malkieD2

    malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 7, 2002
    but you can't do that - you can't draw clear lines of definition when it comes to individual posts.

    If a mod thinks something was over the line, then it probably was for 99% of the viewing population. No harm done in being safe rather than sorry. If people don't listen to warnings then they only have themselves to blame.

    Thousands of people post on a daily basis, have fun and come back again, and never, ever receive a single edit or warning.

    Why constantly push the line ?
     
  11. Lord_NoONE

    Lord_NoONE Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 17, 2001
    malkieD2 posted on 6/24/05 3:39pm
    but you can't do that - you can't draw clear lines of definition when it comes to individual posts.

    If a mod thinks something was over the line, then it probably was for 99% of the viewing population. No harm done in being safe rather than sorry. If people don't listen to warnings then they only have themselves to blame.

    Thousands of people post on a daily basis, have fun and come back again, and never, ever receive a single edit or warning.

    Why constantly push the line ?
    [hr][/blockquote] But it is possible to clarify what is meant by hateful. Those lines can be clearly drawn and then applied to specific, case-by-case posts. Clearly the MS has to retain some sort of discretion as to the definition's application. However, by establishing objective guidelines as to what constitutes a hateful post, whatever those guidelines may be, you at least provide the community with notice of what is clearly over the line. This way people don't have to continually push the line in an effort to figure out precisely where the line has been drawn.

    Depending solely on what "someone might possibly believe is hateful because of a special sensitivity," as was apparently done in this particular instance, is far too subjective and not a constructive step toward building better understanding and policy in the community.

    That is of course my opinion.
     
  12. jedi_master_ousley

    jedi_master_ousley Manager Emeritus star 8 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 14, 2002
    Solution: if you think something has the possibility of being deemed offensive, don't post it.
     
  13. Lord_NoONE

    Lord_NoONE Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 17, 2001
    You're probably right, ousley. That would solve the problem in its entirety but some posters on the boards don't think in those terms.
     
  14. darth-sinister

    darth-sinister Manager Emeritus star 10 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 28, 2001
    It was in poor taste, as is YTMND's signature.

    Let me put it to you like this, would you like to be made fun of in such a manner? Would you like it if all the mods were to start bad mouthing the posters in public? Would you like to have your image used in a way that was offensive?

    Have some respect for the dead and their families.
     
  15. jedi_master_ousley

    jedi_master_ousley Manager Emeritus star 8 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 14, 2002
    Exactly. That is why they are being punished.

    "You will pay the price for your lack of vision!"

    :p
     
  16. YTMND

    YTMND Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Thinking in those terms is just not fun.

    Also to the people who may come here and find Terri Schiavo pics dancing offensiveor in bad taste,how about we criticize the threads about masturbation and sexual orientation while we're at it?

    You may say they are there for reference and discussion,but obviously dirty jokes take place in them.So,now I am offended by seeing masturbation and threads about sexual orientation,also male and female genitalia. I find them in bad taste and ask to have them removed.

    Obviously I realize that I am going to be offended in life,and I should take it like an adult and forget about it.

    Why let it upset me,it's Star Wars board,and if it gets a laugh, good. :)
     
  17. RebelScum77

    RebelScum77 Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Aug 3, 2003
    All this takes is common sense.

    If you post a picture of a comatose woman with the intent of making fun of her, that is hateful.

    If you wouldn't say something to a stranger's face in real life, then don't do it here.


    edit: We are not talking about masturbation or sexual orientation threads here. We are talking about the specific rules for the RotS social thread.
     
  18. YTMND

    YTMND Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Oh,but I would say it to a strangers face.

    Oh and if you're offended by that,I suggest the Hottie Wars,full of buxom women in tasteless poses. All meant for the amusement of male users.

    http://boards.theforce.net/Your_Jedi_Council_Community/b10008/16838640/?7239
     
  19. jedi_master_ousley

    jedi_master_ousley Manager Emeritus star 8 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 14, 2002
    ROTS Forum != JCC Forum

    You can't compare the two. The ROTS forum is meant for discussion of ROTS. The social thread is only open by the grace of the mods. If you have a problem with the topics in JCC, perhaps you should take it up with a JCC mod rather than an ROTS mod.
     
  20. YodaJeff

    YodaJeff Manager Emeritus star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 18, 2001
    I thought only registered members could be flamed.

    "Would you like it if all the mods were to start bad mouthing the posters in public?"

    But posters are registered members here.

    "Would you like to have your image used in a way that was offensive?"

    Been there, done that, laughed it off.
     
  21. Lord_NoONE

    Lord_NoONE Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 17, 2001
    Is YTMND's signature hateful then? Under the standard you enforced last night, it certainly should qualify.

    The problem is that there is no standard for judging whether something violates the RoC/ToS. It's all a subjective judgment call by the moderators. Thus, we have the "problems" in the Social threads and elsewhere with people "pushing the line." The fact is there has never been a clearly demarked line because, as malkie said, you can't do that. Well, why not? I don't see what the problem is defining what the policy is in clearer terms and then applying those terms on a case by case basis. Hell, courts of law do it all the time. Legislatures enact laws, some clearer than others, and then courts apply the language on a case by case basis. Some may say that is precisely what the moderators did in this regard. They interpreted the word hateful to include "someone out there might eventually someday take offense at an image." If that's the standard, then fine...that's the standard. It's a poor standard, however, and one that is rife with potential for abuses and rampant censorship.

    YTMND makes another good point as well concerning specific threads. I bet there is a silent majority that finds threads on masturbation, female genitalia, cats being born with two faces, and other such threads "obscene, vulgar" etc. Why are those threads not closed down under the same rationale of "someone out there might eventually someday take offense"?

    Edit: But it's not just the RotS thread. You're enforcing the board wide RoC to a specific case. It's a management interpretation of the board policy that could, and should, be applied in all fora and all threads, no? If you had not relied on the JC RoC, then you're argument of only interpreting the rules of 3SA would be airtight, but the problem is that the moderators did not rely alone on that foundation. By doing so, IMO, you forfeit the argument of excluding the policy's interpretation and application to the entire JC.

    Look, I don't support what YTMND did with the Schiavo picture, but I think he, and every other user, should be granted some sort of clarification and objective standard. I think the images were in extremely poor taste and without an iota of class. But I would never have interpreted what he did as hateful and relied on that term in the RoC as the basis for an edit or a ban.

    I just believe a line could be drawn and then applied. Perhaps that is what has been done here; I simply believe it was poorly done.
     
  22. Admiral-Snackbar-81

    Admiral-Snackbar-81 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    May 23, 2004
    I first off do not see where people being associated outside of this particular forum should even be brought up.

    I second off do not see where people following TOS by starring out when they say ****, *****, or even, *gasp*, *********, when that is what hte mods request. (and by the way i just said shoe, horse, and actionboy)

    Case to case is a crappy logic for explaining anything, and the mere fact that Malkie openly mocks it *cough cough*, just shows that someone is taking pride in using their situation to abuse.


    Snack-cakes Edit:
    Nuh uh

    Cuz u see, that apparently is also acceptable reason to lock a thread. If you forget where it is from, lemme know and i'll go dig it up.

    TERRY SCHIAVO

    How is this offensive to people? The same people who take offense to this are the same ones who get arrested trying to smuggle in water to a vegetable. Yes, it helps most vegetables grow, but when they're dead on the vine, or stock, you don't constantly keep watering them hoping they will resurrect. She isn't Jesus.

    Is ARUBA going to be a *BANNABLE* offense now too? because it, just as Schiavo, is just the media's hot topic to keep the news away from real news, and those foolish enough to get sucked into it away from what's really going on.

    And how in Terry Schiavo's good name is someone supposed to control how many ani-gif's are on a single page. I see NOTHING in the TOS saying that any type of post has a per page limit, and the basic fact that some people have their post per page ratio set to 100, some to 20, makes this obligatory. I am NOT responsible for anything anyone before me posts. If my post is on topic, regardless of if it includes an attatchment of any manner, so long as it is not a virus, it should not be subject to punishment.
     
  23. My_ScreenName_Sucks

    My_ScreenName_Sucks Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Why is it always this "one certain group" that seems to be causing trouble for everyone else. and yet certain "members" of this group always whine and moan when they know they're violating something get banned?
     
  24. Admiral-Snackbar-81

    Admiral-Snackbar-81 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    May 23, 2004
    Perhaps instead of asking to a forum where said members cant even respond without being banned for "baiting" or "omg itz teh blasphemy roflz," you should ask the source. Asking a group of Asians why they have dead, skinned cats and dogs hanging in their restaurants across the sea would be a better source than asking an American about the cultural signifigance and purposes.

    And no, my little friend, I'm not a member of that certain group, hence, no title in my signature. I'm not a 3SA knight. And when their banninations are due to the things that happen in other threads daily, "whining" is a pretty unjust term.

    But at least we know that you admit you don't know both sides of the story, but have picked one to defend. I salute your open-mindedness, why don't you marry my daughter
     
  25. My_ScreenName_Sucks

    My_ScreenName_Sucks Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Jun 20, 2005
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.