Change in moderator policies

Myrthos said:

Determining when something is an insult is not that black and white. There is always a grey area, which is different from person to person. I obviously will try to keep my personal opinions and preferences out of the equation in determining if something is an insult or not, but will probably fail in completely accomplishing that. It is something we all have to live with I guess

Click to expand...

I think this is something that you don't need to defend or explain. This goes back to Dart's argument that one must be delusional to think that an individual can determine objectively what is "wrong", and moderate in a way that is "right". That would be true - if anyone were actually making such a claim!

But if you think about it for two seconds, it's a silly complaint. Wherever you have a system of rules, or a system of law, no-one imagines you are going to get perfect justice - you are going to rely on someone to interpret those laws, and make a personal determination. Hopefully, it will be as objective as possible, but ultimately it can only come down to one person's take on the situation. The only possible way to avoid that fundamental problem is to have no rules, and no-one moderating.

dteowner said:

Personal attack that adds nothing to the topic at hand. Reported.

Click to expand...

Another attack? Tsk tsk, DTE.

Ripper said:

But if you think about it for two seconds, it's a silly complaint. Wherever you have a system of rules, or a system of law, no-one imagines you are going to get perfect justice - you are going to rely on someone to interpret those laws, and make a personal determination. Hopefully, it will be as objective as possible, but ultimately it can only come down to one person's take on the situation. The only possible way to avoid that fundamental problem is to have no rules, and no-one moderating.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. It's been advertised that this new system is supposed to be fair. You're declaring it cannot be truly fair, but then chastising the people pointing out that it will not be fair. Man the fuck up and admit that the echo chamber wants to remove opinions with which they do not agree. Be honest for once! I'll give you far more credit for admitting the end game is "uniform thought" than continuing this ridiculous farce about the goals being "improved tone".

Well if the opinions contain attacks on individuals or groups, then yes, those opinions need to be removed.

It states quite clearly in the TOS that religion itself is not considered a protected class. Practitioners of a given religion are protected. That was tucked in there to justify the bile that gets spewed at outspoken Christians here. Fair enough. HHR's comments were directed, rather specifically, at the Muslim religion and not at practitioners thereof but were deemed offensive and meriting deletion. The subject of radical Islam is completely relevant to any discussion of events in Brussels because, like it or not, those are the folks that did it and subsequently took credit for it. The posts did not violate the terms of service and were not a disjointed tangent thrown in for effect. What we have here, folks, is what's generally called a double standard.

As I've said 100 times, Myrthos is completely within his rights as site owner to do what he damn well pleases. He's under no obligation to be fair nor to justify his actions. That said, as a long-time member of this community (and the one that preceded it) and active contributor as a moderator and 50% of the spambot patrol for several years, I think I've earned the right to voice opinions about what will benefit this site long term and what will do it harm. We're rapidly losing our sense of community that's been lovingly constructed over years and years. That's not good for RPGWatch.

Religion is not a group of people. It's a belief (or set of beliefs). No one has attacked Christians here (at least that I can remember). The religion or the practices have been questioned but not the people who practice it.

Similar to believing that the Earth is flat. Flat-earthers as a group cannot be attacked per the ToS. But the idea of a flat earth certainly can. If a flat-earther takes an attack on the concept of a flat Earth personally, then that's his problem because he has chosen to be emotionally invested with that concept.

Eh, Thrasher you, yourself participate in "attacking Christians".

Like this quote here:

Pretty much agree with you Celt. Sometimes it can be comforting when it isn't making you feel bad about yourself. But large organized religions are mostly cultish mind control schemes by power mongers.

Click to expand...

Infers that Christians are weak-minded and easy to control and the leaders are power mongers. It is quite insulting but that's what you think and the only thing i can do about it try to change your opinion of it.

I am talking about their practices. If you can't distinguish the difference then it's your problem, not mine.

I've seen these things first hand. No internet missionaries will erase that.

However, if I become a starving street person, and you make me listen to a sermon before feedlng me, then that would be different.

I only saw small glimpse of that thread, so I don't know what happened there, but I will say though that if the objective is to have thoughtfull discussion about the latest tragic terrorist attack, one can't just systematicly rule out the discussion about the concept of radical islam or the people who practise radical islam.

Also imo its troubling that radical islam has gained such a strong foothold in European cities that massive attacks like these are possible. Weren't these both terrorist attacks planned in the same city area or something?

Ofcourse it is not helpfull to blame the entire muslim population about what certain lunatics do. However as we know few political groups are using these attacks to push their own hatefull agenda. So imo its better to openly discuss these kind of views than just sweep them under the rug.

We don't have a policy to discuss reasons for taking moderation actions in public. We never had and I'm not starting it now. It is disappointing that some people make a choice to do so anyway. I think the post in the now closed thread was clear enough. Some of you disagree. Fine. Some of you think I have alterior motives. Also fine. If my history on these forums have convinced you that is the case, There is no point making you see it differently.

When you have finished grinding that axe, I would like to borrow it, because it should be mighty sharp by now, giving the time you have been working it.

And lastly, this thread isn't about Islam or any other religion, but about the change in moderation policies. Stick to the topic.

Deleted the previous post (the one you don't see anymore, which is now virtually between my two posts). You were all warned to stay on topic. So, stay on the topic of the changed moderation policies. Feel free to move the discussion you want to have to another part of the forums

lostforever said:

When say legal, you mean EU law or the TOS of this forum? I do not believe it’s against any EU law to say something like “All Muslims are terrorist” etc.

Click to expand...

I know article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights puts some limitations to the freedom of expression, "since it carries with it duties and responsibilities" (for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, among other things), but I haven't got the time nor the desire to search whether there have been cases similar to your specific example of "All muslims are terrorists" where article 10 has been used.

I do know however that in The Netherlands you would not have to look that far, for the Dutch law is quite clear: such a statement is punishable.
And if Myrthos as a site owner would not remove such a statement after getting a complaint, he can be held accountable, regardless of his personal opinion in the matter.

TOS:

RPGWatch operates under Dutch law.

Click to expand...

Edit:
Not that Myrthos needs a complaint in order to take moderator action, he can remove whatever he likes as long as it has been mentioned in a TOS (or against the law)

So now that moderators have stopped religion hate in this topic, can we finally go back to hating Fallout 4?

No, for some people, F4 IS a religion!!

Corwin said:

No, for some people, F4 IS a religion!!

Click to expand...

Amen to that.

pibbur who <insert preferred sentence here>

I'm just going to say I never poked around in the non-RPG related areas of this site.

They're quite a fascinating place.