Originally posted by Grizzly
I got your TOS right here.
Providing a detailed list of no nos, and a list of banned words will only result in some people pushing the edge and then using the excuse that what they did wasn't on the list.
Yet not providing such a list, leaves each player to their own discretion about what to say.
Personally, I'm all for that.
The problem arises when a particular word, or phrase, or off-topic discussion on the text or vox channels that is not offensive to me, *is* offensive to someone else.
We're each offended by different things. I, for example, find euphamisms much more offensive than the actual swear words that they are substituted for. I figure, if you're gonna cuss, do it right.
Other people disagree. They're perfectly happy to say and hear "fudge" or "fetch" in place of the 'real F word'.
So, which is it? Can we cuss on the channels, or will it get us banned? How about "fudging" or "fetching" or "farking"? Will that get us banned?
How about having a discussion about hockey or boxing, that involves no swearing at all?
How about my texting to a friend, and calling him "*****"? Is that a racial slur, even if that's how we address each other face to face? It's not offensive to me, or to him, but it may offend someone else.
Do I have to dumb-down all my thoughts and language (which two are inseperable -- you can't have one without the other) to the level of a four year old in order to play AH?
Who decides?
Now *that* is the easy one. HiTech decides. It's his game, they're his servers, therefore it's his choice. That is, of course, moderated by the fact that we pay him for the use thereof, which obligates him to defer to our wishes, to a certain extent.
However, if we can't know going in what is acceptable and what isn't, then we don't know we've crossed the line until *after* we get our fingers whacked with the ruler.
That's unfair to everybody, no matter what it is you are or are not offended by.
We can't rely on the "common sense" of the players, or on some vague "community standard" or "what you would say in public" approach either, because what's acceptable on the streets or in a cafe in New York might curdle the blood of the visitors to a bagel shop in Provo, Utah.
I agree that if there is a specific set of guidelines, e.g. words you get muted for saying, then some people will push the limits, and point at the guidelines saying "but I didn't say a banned word".
... but that's exactly what we had before, only now there's a punishment involved, and nobody knows just exactly what will earn them that punishment, and what won't. You say something that is acceptable to you, but offends someone else, and you get zapped. How can you be sure that everybody else who did exactly the same thing you did also got zapped? How would you feel if you were the only person who got zapped for doing what you did, and nobody else who did exactly the same thing got zapped like you did -- something that is perfectly reasonable and acceptable *TO YOU*?
It's obvious most players know what they shouldn't say...
Ah,yes, the old "it's obvious" argument.
I once had a professor of mathematics who was chalking up some equations on the board, and making derivations. At one point, he said "so it's obvious that blahblahblahundecipherablemat
hgobbledygook".
A student told him that it was not obvious to him, and could he please go through the derivation.
It took him three blackboards and four sheets of paper to show how "obvious" his declaration was.
At this point I would point out that mathematical proofs are significantly more concrete and logically proveable that interpersonal communications or relationships.
And generally people know what not to say to prevent getting punched in the nose in a bar full of black folks.
Oh, so only black folks are violent and quick to anger?
That sentence could be very easily taken out of context (just like much of what appears on the text channels in AH) and twisted by a beligerent or easily offended mind into proof that you, sir, are an unrepentant racist, and could you please be permanently banned from the game.
All a list of infractions will do is inform players just how far they can go before crossing the line. Those who choose to push the limits are throwing themselves upon the mercy of the moderators who are then forced to make a decision whether or not to allow it. This results in inconsistency, depending upon the moderator and how he/she feels at the time. This is when we hear crying about how some nasty moderator who picked on some poor boob who should have known better than to push the edge in the first place.
You expect consistency from a user-based reporting system?
How do you know what will offend the people who happen to be directly around you at the moment, and what will cause them to report you? How about the people you were around 5 minutes ago? Or the people you will be around 5 minutes from now? How can you possibly know what you will be reported for, or when, if there are no guidelines about what can/should be reported?
It is possible to go through a lifetime in this game without getting warned, many accomplish this. But those who choose to dance with the devil should not complain when they get burned. That's all the TOS you need to know.
Have a nice day...
Benjamin Franklin once said "If all Printers were determin'd not to print any thing till they were sure it would offend no body, there would be very little printed."
I still think the best moderation is at the user endpoint. That way, everybody can choose for themselves what's acceptable to them personally, or not. Don't like what's being said on the country channel? Don't tune the country channel. Don't like what's being said on channel 200? Don't tune channel 200. Don't like what's coming over the Range VOX? It sure would be nice to be able to *not* tune the Range VOX ...
