Advertisement
by Sierra Lyricalia » Thu Mar 12, 2015 10:51 am
by The Sapientia » Thu Mar 12, 2015 10:56 am
Todd McCloud wrote:I liked what Xoriet wrote. At the end of the day, we're all humans (or foxes) typing behind some kind of computer.
by United RussoAsia » Thu Mar 12, 2015 11:30 am
by Glen-Rhodes » Thu Mar 12, 2015 11:59 am
by The Blaatschapen » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:24 pm
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Dropping toxic people isn't "extreme." But whatever. I'll continue to disassociate with jerks. Guess that makes me the bad guy now!
Todd McCloud wrote: At the end of the day, we're all humans (or foxes) typing behind some kind of computer.
by RiderSyl » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:25 pm
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Dropping toxic people isn't "extreme." But whatever. I'll continue to disassociate with jerks. Guess that makes me the bad guy now!
by Xoriet » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:31 pm
by Todd McCloud » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:41 pm
by Benevolent Thomas » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:49 pm
Xoriet wrote:Ridersyl wrote:
That's not the part of your argument that people are having problems with.
Everyone disassociates with people who are unsavory to them and others, Glen. I don't talk to many people I have incurable problems with. But I'm not going to stand up and say "This person needs to be ostracized!"
The bad guy is a funny term. Just because we disagree with you doesn't make you a villain.
Ballotonia wrote:Personally, I think there's something seriously wrong with a game if it willfully allows the destruction of longtime player communities in favor of kids whose sole purpose is to enjoy ruining the game for others.
by Glen-Rhodes » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:51 pm
by Solorni » Thu Mar 12, 2015 1:00 pm
by Zaolat » Thu Mar 12, 2015 1:06 pm
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Why not? Why are we under any obligation to "reform" the behavior of the people you're targeting, and why is it being cast as mean or whatever to simply drop those people?
The thing is, you're NOT going to change their minds. They ALREADY think it's okay to do these things, and their behavior is reinforced by friends who defend them. By not naming names and shaming them, you're creating an environment where there aren't any consequences to their actions. Do you really expect anybody to have some kind of epiphany and self-realization that what they've done is wrong? That's not how people work.
Feel free to take that route. But I don't think it's ever worked before. I tried to appeal to people's better nature the last time they started using mental health information against players. Obviously that didn't do anything!
by Ambrella » Thu Mar 12, 2015 1:11 pm
Solorni wrote:Xoriet of course, has no burden to name and shame people. It was not her intent to do so and if people wish for naming and shaming should engage in that process themselves. I think the main factor however which I believe wasn't stated by the article is that personal attacks are very dependent on the culture of the place in which they are occurring. Some regions undoubtedly have a culture of acceptance and even promotion of personal attacks (this can be divided into cliques within region). It is up to the leadership of regions to set standards and to lead the way in keeping personal attacks out of it. While the game has definitely become and more social, it is vital that we try our best to maintain positive interactions. Unfortunately, negative interactions are a part of life especially on the internet. But the most important thing for each individual community to do is to ensure that it is not part of their culture.
Furthermore, there is a worrying amount of tit for tat when it comes to personal attacks and this tends to spiral out of control. It is more difficult to prevent personal attacks across regions than it is simply within them. This is where most of the work should be done. It's tricky though. Perhaps a partial solution is that the worst offending regions that promote this sort of behaviour should be treated as black sheep. But generally it isn't clear cut on the international stage.
by RiderSyl » Thu Mar 12, 2015 2:36 pm
Glen-Rhodes wrote:Do you really expect anybody to have some kind of epiphany and self-realization that what they've done is wrong? That's not how people work.
by Unibot III » Thu Mar 12, 2015 4:06 pm
Sierra Lyricalia wrote:To the Editor:
Thanks for running the extremely informative and edifying article by Dr George. It may interest your readers to note that the NS economic indicators are less simplistic than Dr George inadvertently implied. It is possible to attain a Frightening economic rating while simultaneously protecting the rights of your nation's workers, consumers, and environment. I myself currently boast a 99 economic rating, a nearly 93% tax rate (not as proud of that one ), high ratings for income equality and employment level, and "Top 5% of the World" badges for Beautiful Environment, Eco-Friendly Government, and Good Weather. While I stipulate that far and away my biggest industry is Tourism and these badges would likely go away if my economy were that invested in, say, Automobile Manufacturing; and to be fair I've had some difficulty of late keeping my Political Freedoms and Civil Rights up (that can't be blamed solely on WA membership); nevertheless these results do show that it's possible to have it all, economically speaking. Thanks for a fine publication.
Signed,
The Evangelizing Metasyndicate of Sierra Lyricalia
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
by KaelThas Quilor » Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:35 pm
The Bruce wrote:I sometimes suspect that Cerian Quilor is here to harvest the tears of young, ambitious nations.
Cormac Stark wrote:my opinion of me, as usual, is the only one that matters. :p
by Zaolat » Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:53 pm
KaelThas Quilor wrote:I cannot believe I'm agreeing with Glen.... I'll just echo his words, since they say it well, and clearly it won't sway the lot of you.
by Misley » Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:55 pm
by Solorni » Thu Mar 12, 2015 8:07 pm
Misley wrote:I think Xoriet's article was very clear to readers who recognize the incidents that led to its creation.
It's kind of ridiculous to hear the suggestion to "name and shame" when that's precisely what some of us did, and instead of them becoming "black sheep" as anticipated by GR, people jumped to their defense and trotted out all manner of excuses. People who have been paying attention know this, also.
Thankfully, the last two weeks have been much more civil, to everyone's credit - at least from what I have seen, as I've been cutting back my activity on NS lately.
by The Letherii » Thu Mar 12, 2015 10:30 pm
Zaolat wrote:KaelThas Quilor wrote:I cannot believe I'm agreeing with Glen.... I'll just echo his words, since they say it well, and clearly it won't sway the lot of you.
Because an issue is being made where there is none. If no one can see the point of Xoriet's article then they shouldn't be arguing something that's irrelevant. We all agree people who cross the line are being jackasses. The difference is, how one acts upoun those being more than just jerks.
Whether or not someone is being shamed or not is irrelevant. Not everyone is comfortable dropping bombs on the aggressors except as a last resort when ignoring and appealing will not work. It's not that it's too much effort or necessarily giving second chances or assuming they'll stop, it's just not their M.O.
You may not agree personally, but there is nothing wrong with it and arguing it is asinine.
by Zaolat » Thu Mar 12, 2015 10:44 pm
The Letherii wrote:Zaolat wrote:Because an issue is being made where there is none. If no one can see the point of Xoriet's article then they shouldn't be arguing something that's irrelevant. We all agree people who cross the line are being jackasses. The difference is, how one acts upoun those being more than just jerks.
Whether or not someone is being shamed or not is irrelevant. Not everyone is comfortable dropping bombs on the aggressors except as a last resort when ignoring and appealing will not work. It's not that it's too much effort or necessarily giving second chances or assuming they'll stop, it's just not their M.O.
You may not agree personally, but there is nothing wrong with it and arguing it is asinine.
I'm talking less about the issue of naming names, and the fact that, comfortable with it or not, the people who do these things Xoriet condemns should be condemned right along with it. You aren't going to stop this by just appealing to their better natures, or making general posts about being better people and not crossing that RL-NS line. But now that this has been written, people can read it, say it was great, and then pat themselves on the back and go back to doing nothing about it.
-Cerian with a puppet. *kills his browser*
by Canton Empire » Fri Mar 13, 2015 6:01 am
by Corvus Corax » Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:02 am
by KaelThas Quilor » Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:40 am
Zaolat wrote:The Letherii wrote:I'm talking less about the issue of naming names, and the fact that, comfortable with it or not, the people who do these things Xoriet condemns should be condemned right along with it. You aren't going to stop this by just appealing to their better natures, or making general posts about being better people and not crossing that RL-NS line. But now that this has been written, people can read it, say it was great, and then pat themselves on the back and go back to doing nothing about it.
-Cerian with a puppet. *kills his browser*
Right you take the analytical approach and cynical path (Which the latter is not wrong, I take it too when I feel it necessary). Thing is, even just reading all that, is the gameplay community going to buck up and start being aggressive to combat that rather than pat each other on the backs? If we say let's take Glen's opinion and make it happen, would enough follow suit?
We've already seen we can't even entirely ostracize forum destroyers as of late (Not that I personally take such a hardcore hardline stance on that subject). Though yes, players assaulting/harassing other players beyond the game is completely worse than a forum destroyer, is there enough momentum to actually ostracize these people nearly entirely? Once we do go down the path of being aggressive to isolate them will we also fall down that slippery slope of drama and negativity and by extension make a toxic situation even more toxic?
Food for thought.
The Bruce wrote:I sometimes suspect that Cerian Quilor is here to harvest the tears of young, ambitious nations.
Cormac Stark wrote:my opinion of me, as usual, is the only one that matters. :p
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Achanisia, Attempted Socialism
Advertisement