NATION

PASSWORD

NationStates Rules Are Too Strict

Who needs it, who got it, who hands it out and why.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jun 15, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Qwertyuioplkjhgfd » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:48 pm

Rhodesia-Zimbabwe wrote:it seems like your issue isn't with the rules but with how they're enforced and with the people who enforce them

maybe this should be retittled to "NS mods are too strict" instead of the rules.

btw why did u make this post? to rabblerouse? if this is actually like NK you're just digging your own grave man


Yeah, you're right. But if I mentioned the mods in the title so they could see it clearly I feel like it would be deleted more quickly (instead of like half an hour later).

User avatar
Catsfern
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 199
Founded: Mar 09, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Catsfern » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:49 pm

well hey the thread made it to a second page.
I use NS stats that applies to everyone no exceptions, for details telegram me or don't and NO we are not a nation of cats
WIP wiki here https://catsfern.fandom.com/wiki/Catsfern_WikiWIKI ALWAYS UPDATING!Most recent page: Military
ASK ME ANYTHING HERE https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=464664
100 COPIES OF MY OWN NATIONS CARD! https://www.nationstates.net/page=deck/collection=240
Catsfernian Newspaper! (new edition every Monday / edition 6 out now) https://docs.google.com/document/d/15CywWf8K6aSGbr63zhtnrIHsl4Y3X-mLVO2xOiUemro/edit?usp=sharing
My thoughts on NS stats https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1255156

User avatar
El-Amin Caliphate
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15283
Founded: Apr 05, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby El-Amin Caliphate » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:49 pm

El-Amin Caliphate wrote:
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
Yeah, those are mostly for specific instances, correct me if I'm wrong. This is mostly about the general phenomenon.

Yeah you can still post there for general stuff. As for questions about mod rule, you could/should also post using the Appeals Process
Kubumba Tribe's sister nation. NOT A PUPPET! >w< In fact, this one came 1st.
Proud Full Member of the Council of Islamic Cooperation!^u^
I'm a (Pan) Islamist ;)
CLICK THIS
https://americanvision.org/948/theonomy-vs-theocracy/ wrote:God’s law cannot govern a nation where God’s law does not rule in the hearts of the people

Democracy and Freedom Index
Plaetopia wrote:Partly Free / Hybrid regime (score 4-6) El-Amin Caliphate (5.33)

User avatar
Nakena
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5232
Founded: May 06, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Nakena » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:49 pm

People on NSG tend to overestimate the relevance of NSG.

Everywhere else its mostly seen as a containment board.
【Your friendly neighbourhood barista and genderqueer degenerate bohemian】
【Female or they/them pronoun preferred but not required】

₴Ø₦₳₭ Ø₴

User avatar
Bluelight-R006
Senator
 
Posts: 4264
Founded: Mar 31, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bluelight-R006 » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:50 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
Rhodesia-Zimbabwe wrote:it seems like your issue isn't with the rules but with how they're enforced and with the people who enforce them

maybe this should be retittled to "NS mods are too strict" instead of the rules.

btw why did u make this post? to rabblerouse? if this is actually like NK you're just digging your own grave man


Yeah, you're right. But if I mentioned the mods in the title so they could see it clearly I feel like it would be deleted more quickly (instead of like half an hour later).

Mods see everything. They are from different time zones thus they can check the forums topic at a time. In fact, this thread is so active they’d have seen it by now. If I were a mod I’d also have came here in suspicion.

User avatar
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jun 15, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Qwertyuioplkjhgfd » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:50 pm

Rhodesia-Zimbabwe wrote:
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:I believe it is comparable to saying that if a person does not like slavery in the U.S. they can leave the U.S., or if a black did not like the segregation policies they can go back to African later in U.S. history.


it isn't at all comparable because while you can leave nationstates.net and go to another website the slaves didn't have that liberty to leave their country
also kind of offensive to compare something so trivial to slavery not gonna lie


In the times of Jim-Crow they did have that liberty, there weren't slaves. I should have focused on the Jim-Crow laws where there were actual movements to leave the U.S. and go to Liberia. And again, this makes my point, just because it is trivial and I'm comparing it to slavery, I don't think automatically it's a delete.

User avatar
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jun 15, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Qwertyuioplkjhgfd » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:52 pm

Bluelight-R006 wrote:
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
Yeah, you're right. But if I mentioned the mods in the title so they could see it clearly I feel like it would be deleted more quickly (instead of like half an hour later).

Mods see everything. They are from different time zones thus they can check the forums topic at a time. In fact, this thread is so active they’d have seen it by now. If I were a mod I’d also have came here in suspicion.


I don't think that's quite right. They're volunteers, I saw in some rules or moderation post, so there are instances where they may not immediately see stuff, even if they are different time zones I don't think there is always a mod. Maybe I'm wrong.

User avatar
El-Amin Caliphate
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15283
Founded: Apr 05, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby El-Amin Caliphate » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:52 pm

Huh, it wasn't locked, just moved.
Welp, let's have it, y'all :p
Kubumba Tribe's sister nation. NOT A PUPPET! >w< In fact, this one came 1st.
Proud Full Member of the Council of Islamic Cooperation!^u^
I'm a (Pan) Islamist ;)
CLICK THIS
https://americanvision.org/948/theonomy-vs-theocracy/ wrote:God’s law cannot govern a nation where God’s law does not rule in the hearts of the people

Democracy and Freedom Index
Plaetopia wrote:Partly Free / Hybrid regime (score 4-6) El-Amin Caliphate (5.33)

User avatar
Bluelight-R006
Senator
 
Posts: 4264
Founded: Mar 31, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bluelight-R006 » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:54 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
Bluelight-R006 wrote:Mods see everything. They are from different time zones thus they can check the forums topic at a time. In fact, this thread is so active they’d have seen it by now. If I were a mod I’d also have came here in suspicion.


I don't think that's quite right. They're volunteers, I saw in some rules or moderation post, so there are instances where they may not immediately see stuff, even if they are different time zones I don't think there is always a mod. Maybe I'm wrong.

You definitely are wrong. Everywhere and everytime there is a mod to respond to rulebreakers. Never once have I seen a plea for help been prolonged for up to half an hour before the mods can respond.

And hey, they also saw this because they moved it to Moderation.

User avatar
Reploid Productions
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 25831
Founded: Antiquity
Democratic Socialists

Postby Reploid Productions » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:55 pm

Thread towed to the appropriate forum.

A vague "rules are too strict" is not much of a useful discussion starter however, so I'm not optimistic that this will be a particularly productive discussion of the site rules.
Forum mod since May 8, 2003 -- Game mod since May 19, 2003
Reppy's DoGA FAQ - For those using DoGA to make their NS military and such
One Stop Rules Shop -- Reppy's Sig Workshop -- Getting Help Page
[violet] wrote:Maybe we could power our new search engine from the sexual tension between you two.
Ifreann wrote:Bring Reppy your signet rings, she is our Brony Queen now!

I believe in the magic of friendship, the wholly awesome bronydom, the conventions of fans,
the forgiveness of haters, the resurrection of faith in humanity, and love everlasting.

In nomine poni, et filly, et spiritus stable.
Char Aznable/Giant Meteor 2020! - Forcing humanity to move into space and progress whether we goddamn want to or not!

User avatar
The Free Joy State
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 9432
Founded: Jan 05, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The Free Joy State » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:55 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
The Free Joy State wrote:Not a mod but when you signed up for the site you agreed to follow the rules. If you're not happy with the T&Cs you signed on for, you don't have to stay.

This is a PG-13 site (which is stated in the rules), which means that what goes on Instagram does not go on here.

Most people quite like being on a site where flaming and trolling are policed. If you would rather that not happen, you are free to go find a more permissive nation simulator (or start one yourself).


I also believe that rules can be changed and made better. I believe it is comparable to saying that if a person does not like slavery in the U.S. they can leave the U.S., or if a black did not like the segregation policies they can go back to African later in U.S. history. My comment on Instagram was in response to someone saying NS is like instagram, which I was saying it isn't, like you said. I also agree flaming and trolling should be moderated. It is just people purpose try to find any instance in a debate when something could be considered a flame or troll. For instance, my whole argument can be a flame towards all the mods. The rules says "anything with an intention to offend."That can be so many things in a debate. Why wouldn't nationstates creator Max Barry be offended with my argument?

If you wish, specifically, to appeal, I suggest you make a thread to do just that in Moderation (again -- not a mod), as this general discussion is not the way to appeal any moderation decisions.

As for your argument: being told you can leave a website is not like being told you can leave the country of your birth, and not being able to post threads on defecation and its merits on one specific website is not being like forced into servitude. Please, try to remain proportionate.

The rules on flaming are actually quite laid out, and the Mods here are proportionate in their interpretation.

Flaming is:
Personal attacks against other players, expressed via OOC (out-of-character) comments; insults, swearing and anything posted with intent to offend. In-character remarks can be interpreted this way as well; watch what you post if other posters are unaware you're not serious. Erudite slams while maintaining a veneer of politeness can also be considered flaming. Repeated instances of flaming directed at the same player can be considered harassment, a more serious offense.


Flaming is not merely saying something that someone doesn't wish to hear or discussing the rules (you are allowed to attack an argument, for example). Though, again, if your aim is merely to overturn a punishment you received, this is not the way to go about it.
"If there's a book that you want to read, but it hasn't been written yet, then you must write it." - Toni Morrison

My nation does not represent my beliefs or politics.

User avatar
LiberNovusAmericae
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5399
Founded: Mar 10, 2018
Left-Leaning College State

Postby LiberNovusAmericae » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:56 pm

El-Amin Caliphate wrote:Huh, it wasn't locked, just moved.
Welp, let's have it, y'all :p

I'm not surprised. You can discuss the rules of NS within reason, as long as it is in the right board.
Nova Cyberia wrote:Thank you. I appreciate your respect for my low opinion of you.
Click here.

Rights are what the people are willing to fight for.

User avatar
Catsfern
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 199
Founded: Mar 09, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Catsfern » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:57 pm

well a mod has responded and yeah i probably this conversation going nowhere but hey who knows.
I use NS stats that applies to everyone no exceptions, for details telegram me or don't and NO we are not a nation of cats
WIP wiki here https://catsfern.fandom.com/wiki/Catsfern_WikiWIKI ALWAYS UPDATING!Most recent page: Military
ASK ME ANYTHING HERE https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=464664
100 COPIES OF MY OWN NATIONS CARD! https://www.nationstates.net/page=deck/collection=240
Catsfernian Newspaper! (new edition every Monday / edition 6 out now) https://docs.google.com/document/d/15CywWf8K6aSGbr63zhtnrIHsl4Y3X-mLVO2xOiUemro/edit?usp=sharing
My thoughts on NS stats https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1255156

User avatar
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jun 15, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Qwertyuioplkjhgfd » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:58 pm

Bluelight-R006 wrote:
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
I also believe that rules can be changed and made better. I believe it is comparable to saying that if a person does not like slavery in the U.S. they can leave the U.S., or if a black did not like the segregation policies they can go back to African later in U.S. history. My comment on Instagram was in response to someone saying NS is like instagram, which I was saying it isn't, like you said. I also agree flaming and trolling should be moderated. It is just people purpose try to find any instance in a debate when something could be considered a flame or troll. For instance, my whole argument can be a flame towards all the mods. The rules says "anything with an intention to offend."That can be so many things in a debate. Why wouldn't nationstates creator Max Barry be offended with my argument?

Your whole argument against moderation is what I wouldn’t consider flaming. You have reasons and you don’t question their intelligence nor sanity. Also, I think if the moderators thought this was not legal, they’d have shut it down already.

And intention to offend is anything that shoves opinions down any players’ throat, or questioning their right to exist... sort of things that are out of topic and just questions the person itself and not his/her opinion.

Don’t forget, the rules protect you. If I called you a contemptuous noun, i’d be warned or punished.



That's the whole thing: I'm being ultra concerned with my language. Debate should be free thought, not so excessive to cause cyberbullying, but not so that I'm thinking so much about how to be polite and kind and just. And that is you, maybe if I argued for slavery with reasons and not questions intelligence, if I argued for killing Jews with reasons and not questioning neither the Jews nor the Nazis' intelligence nor sanity, I would still get shut down (the Jews example was in the rules). Talking about killing Jews is certainly pg-13 I would think if it was just a philosophical discussion (in my school we recreated the Nuremberg trials as a project, some people in that will say offensive things about jews).

User avatar
Mexican Liberation
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1849
Founded: May 18, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Mexican Liberation » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:05 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
Bluelight-R006 wrote:Your whole argument against moderation is what I wouldn’t consider flaming. You have reasons and you don’t question their intelligence nor sanity. Also, I think if the moderators thought this was not legal, they’d have shut it down already.

And intention to offend is anything that shoves opinions down any players’ throat, or questioning their right to exist... sort of things that are out of topic and just questions the person itself and not his/her opinion.

Don’t forget, the rules protect you. If I called you a contemptuous noun, i’d be warned or punished.



That's the whole thing: I'm being ultra concerned with my language. Debate should be free thought, not so excessive to cause cyberbullying, but not so that I'm thinking so much about how to be polite and kind and just. And that is you, maybe if I argued for slavery with reasons and not questions intelligence, if I argued for killing Jews with reasons and not questioning neither the Jews nor the Nazis' intelligence nor sanity, I would still get shut down (the Jews example was in the rules). Talking about killing Jews is certainly pg-13 I would think if it was just a philosophical discussion (in my school we recreated the Nuremberg trials as a project, some people in that will say offensive things about jews).


You actually CAN debate that stuff. There have been a LOT of controversial debates on this site. You're probably worried about offending the entire community right? No one here is offended by that stuff, they only get offended when someone doesn't cite their sources or makes it into a rant instead of an actual debate question (eg. I think this is good because this is good.).

You probably got the Jew part from the custom field section of the rules. No swastikas or Hitler on your flag or motto etc. Why? To stop people from trolling (offending others on purpose just to be offensive, no debates or anything)
Last edited by Mexican Liberation on Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Libertarian Socialism
I don't RP but if you're curious: cyberpunk New Spain, or steampunk or fantasy, depends on the mood

User avatar
Bluelight-R006
Senator
 
Posts: 4264
Founded: Mar 31, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bluelight-R006 » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:06 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
Bluelight-R006 wrote:Your whole argument against moderation is what I wouldn’t consider flaming. You have reasons and you don’t question their intelligence nor sanity. Also, I think if the moderators thought this was not legal, they’d have shut it down already.

And intention to offend is anything that shoves opinions down any players’ throat, or questioning their right to exist... sort of things that are out of topic and just questions the person itself and not his/her opinion.

Don’t forget, the rules protect you. If I called you a contemptuous noun, i’d be warned or punished.



That's the whole thing: I'm being ultra concerned with my language. Debate should be free thought, not so excessive to cause cyberbullying, but not so that I'm thinking so much about how to be polite and kind and just. And that is you, maybe if I argued for slavery with reasons and not questions intelligence, if I argued for killing Jews with reasons and not questioning neither the Jews nor the Nazis' intelligence nor sanity, I would still get shut down (the Jews example was in the rules). Talking about killing Jews is certainly pg-13 I would think if it was just a philosophical discussion (in my school we recreated the Nuremberg trials as a project, some people in that will say offensive things about jews).

Yeah well, I prefer to be kind to everyone because ‘do unto others what you want them to do unto you.’ I also want to stay out of the way of the banhammer, and not take any risks. It’s the two only things stopping me from spouting out harsh words about your opinion that may offend you, but it’s still within legality because I don’t question your existence and all that offensive stuff. Other players tend to go more extreme, but they are still within accordance of the law.

Mexican Liberation wrote:
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:

That's the whole thing: I'm being ultra concerned with my language. Debate should be free thought, not so excessive to cause cyberbullying, but not so that I'm thinking so much about how to be polite and kind and just. And that is you, maybe if I argued for slavery with reasons and not questions intelligence, if I argued for killing Jews with reasons and not questioning neither the Jews nor the Nazis' intelligence nor sanity, I would still get shut down (the Jews example was in the rules). Talking about killing Jews is certainly pg-13 I would think if it was just a philosophical discussion (in my school we recreated the Nuremberg trials as a project, some people in that will say offensive things about jews).


You actually CAN debate that stuff. There have been a LOT of controversial debates on this site. You're probably worried about offending the entire community right? No one here is offended by that stuff, they only get offended when someone doesn't cite their sources or makes it into a rant instead of an actual debate question (eg. I think this is good because this is good.).
Last edited by Bluelight-R006 on Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Marxist Germany
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1109
Founded: Jun 07, 2018
New York Times Democracy

Postby Marxist Germany » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:06 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
Bluelight-R006 wrote:Your whole argument against moderation is what I wouldn’t consider flaming. You have reasons and you don’t question their intelligence nor sanity. Also, I think if the moderators thought this was not legal, they’d have shut it down already.

And intention to offend is anything that shoves opinions down any players’ throat, or questioning their right to exist... sort of things that are out of topic and just questions the person itself and not his/her opinion.

Don’t forget, the rules protect you. If I called you a contemptuous noun, i’d be warned or punished.



That's the whole thing: I'm being ultra concerned with my language. Debate should be free thought, not so excessive to cause cyberbullying, but not so that I'm thinking so much about how to be polite and kind and just. And that is you, maybe if I argued for slavery with reasons and not questions intelligence, if I argued for killing Jews with reasons and not questioning neither the Jews nor the Nazis' intelligence nor sanity, I would still get shut down (the Jews example was in the rules). Talking about killing Jews is certainly pg-13 I would think if it was just a philosophical discussion (in my school we recreated the Nuremberg trials as a project, some people in that will say offensive things about jews).

Calling for the death of people isn't a very acceptable opinion. You are free to express your opinion without insults, slurs, or advocating death.
Last edited by Marxist Germany on Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Country represents RL views mostly. Not Marxist anymore.
Author of GA#461

Ex-delegate of The United Federations; citizen of 10000 Islands | Gaming User#0721(Discord)
RP name: Germany
The National Factbook (WIP)
Ambassador Klaus Schmidt
Political Compass
PolitiStates Result
Pro:Laissez-faire, Nationalism, Guns, Free speech, Christianity, Same-sex marriage, United Ireland.
Anti:Extreme Progressivism, Abortion, Socialism, Interventionism, Mass-migration.
A high school student aged 15 from Ireland, living in Co. Dublin. Interested in politics, gaming, and history.

User avatar
Kyrusia
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 9458
Founded: Nov 12, 2007
Capitalizt

Postby Kyrusia » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:08 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:...if I argued for killing Jews...

Arguing "for killing $group" is never going to be acceptable on this forum; we pretty much don't care what reasons you provide. It qualifies as malicious under our Terms & Conditions of Use. More specifically, it qualifies as "advocating death," a subset we roll under the rule against trolling. If that's what your idea of a "philosophical discussion" is, then I'll point out you have absolutely no free speech here, and can have that sort of "philosophical discussion" on a site willing to tolerate it.

There's a difference between advocating for, say, the death penalty or even acts of war, and arguing for genocide/ethnic cleaning/overall exterminating any given $group_of_people. And yes. There's a difference between talking about genocide, and "[arguing] for killing" a group of people.
One Stop Rules Shop | RP Mentors | FT Advice & Assistance Thread | FT: Helpful Links
Senior Game Moderator and Senior N&I Roleplay Mentor specializing in Future Technology. Ask away!
"Kyrusia. Brooding, irrepressible, immeasurable." — The United Dominion

User avatar
Katganistan
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 31765
Founded: Antiquity
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Katganistan » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:09 pm

If you really want to say things about killing a whole subset of our posters, you can say it on a site that allows that.

Which is not here.

Also, it's rather entitled to come to a website and demand it changes the rules it's had for fifteen+ years because you don't care for them.

Stay, and stay within the rules for civil/debate and not trolling, or go somewhere more to your liking. No one is throwing you out, nor are they putting a gun to your head to make you stay.

Your experience here is pretty much governed by how much you want to be a part of the community. If you don't want to follow the rules, it will be significantly less fun for you.

User avatar
Mexican Liberation
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1849
Founded: May 18, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Mexican Liberation » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:11 pm

Kyrusia wrote:
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:...if I argued for killing Jews...

Arguing "for killing $group" is never going to be acceptable on this forum; we pretty much don't care what reasons you provide. It qualifies as malicious under our Terms & Conditions of Use. More specifically, it qualifies as "advocating death," a subset we roll under the rule against trolling. If that's what your idea of a "philosophical discussion" is, then I'll point out you have absolutely no free speech here, and can have that sort of "philosophical discussion" on a site willing to tolerate it.

There's a difference between advocating for, say, the death penalty or even acts of war, and arguing for genocide/ethnic cleaning/overall exterminating any given $group_of_people. And yes. There's a difference between talking about genocide, and "[arguing] for killing" a group of people.


Oh dang, yeah, forgot about that. There is free thought on this forum if you follow guidelines, but if to you, free thought means giving others a way to let out their hostile fantasies, yeah...not gonna fly here.
Libertarian Socialism
I don't RP but if you're curious: cyberpunk New Spain, or steampunk or fantasy, depends on the mood

User avatar
Reploid Productions
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 25831
Founded: Antiquity
Democratic Socialists

Postby Reploid Productions » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:11 pm

Mexican Liberation wrote:
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:

That's the whole thing: I'm being ultra concerned with my language. Debate should be free thought, not so excessive to cause cyberbullying, but not so that I'm thinking so much about how to be polite and kind and just. And that is you, maybe if I argued for slavery with reasons and not questions intelligence, if I argued for killing Jews with reasons and not questioning neither the Jews nor the Nazis' intelligence nor sanity, I would still get shut down (the Jews example was in the rules). Talking about killing Jews is certainly pg-13 I would think if it was just a philosophical discussion (in my school we recreated the Nuremberg trials as a project, some people in that will say offensive things about jews).


You actually CAN debate that stuff. There have been a LOT of controversial debates on this site. You're probably worried about offending the entire community right? No one here is offended by that stuff, they only get offended when someone doesn't cite their sources or makes it into a rant instead of an actual debate question (eg. I think this is good because this is good.).

Eh... actually, there is no way to argue in favor of killing <IRL group> that isn't considered trolling. Because pretty much any way you say it, "members of X group should die/be killed/etc" is an inflammatory statement that runs afoul of one or more of the big six guidelines that the site rules are derived from:
What can't I post?

Any content that is:
  • obscene
  • illegal
  • threatening
  • malicious
  • defamatory
  • spam
Forum mod since May 8, 2003 -- Game mod since May 19, 2003
Reppy's DoGA FAQ - For those using DoGA to make their NS military and such
One Stop Rules Shop -- Reppy's Sig Workshop -- Getting Help Page
[violet] wrote:Maybe we could power our new search engine from the sexual tension between you two.
Ifreann wrote:Bring Reppy your signet rings, she is our Brony Queen now!

I believe in the magic of friendship, the wholly awesome bronydom, the conventions of fans,
the forgiveness of haters, the resurrection of faith in humanity, and love everlasting.

In nomine poni, et filly, et spiritus stable.
Char Aznable/Giant Meteor 2020! - Forcing humanity to move into space and progress whether we goddamn want to or not!

User avatar
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jun 15, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Qwertyuioplkjhgfd » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:11 pm

Mexican Liberation wrote:
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:

That's the whole thing: I'm being ultra concerned with my language. Debate should be free thought, not so excessive to cause cyberbullying, but not so that I'm thinking so much about how to be polite and kind and just. And that is you, maybe if I argued for slavery with reasons and not questions intelligence, if I argued for killing Jews with reasons and not questioning neither the Jews nor the Nazis' intelligence nor sanity, I would still get shut down (the Jews example was in the rules). Talking about killing Jews is certainly pg-13 I would think if it was just a philosophical discussion (in my school we recreated the Nuremberg trials as a project, some people in that will say offensive things about jews).


You actually CAN debate that stuff. There have been a LOT of controversial debates on this site. You're probably worried about offending the entire community right? No one here is offended by that stuff, they only get offended when someone doesn't cite their sources or makes it into a rant instead of an actual debate question (eg. I think this is good because this is good.).

You probably got the Jew part from the custom field section of the rules. No swastikas or Hitler on your flag or motto etc. Why? To stop people from trolling (offending others on purpose just to be offensive, no debates or anything)



This is what I'm talking about. If you saw Marxist Germany's last post, I wouldn't think you are right. He does not think the death of Jews can be discussed in an actual debate just because it is controversial. It's just like some people think homosexuality can't be debated: it's a given anyone can be gay if they feel like it and offensive to even discuss it. Not according to anyone deeply religious.

User avatar
The Free Joy State
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 9432
Founded: Jan 05, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The Free Joy State » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:14 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:
Bluelight-R006 wrote:Your whole argument against moderation is what I wouldn’t consider flaming. You have reasons and you don’t question their intelligence nor sanity. Also, I think if the moderators thought this was not legal, they’d have shut it down already.

And intention to offend is anything that shoves opinions down any players’ throat, or questioning their right to exist... sort of things that are out of topic and just questions the person itself and not his/her opinion.

Don’t forget, the rules protect you. If I called you a contemptuous noun, i’d be warned or punished.



That's the whole thing: I'm being ultra concerned with my language. Debate should be free thought, not so excessive to cause cyberbullying, but not so that I'm thinking so much about how to be polite and kind and just. And that is you, maybe if I argued for slavery with reasons and not questions intelligence, if I argued for killing Jews with reasons and not questioning neither the Jews nor the Nazis' intelligence nor sanity, I would still get shut down (the Jews example was in the rules). Talking about killing Jews is certainly pg-13 I would think if it was just a philosophical discussion (in my school we recreated the Nuremberg trials as a project, some people in that will say offensive things about jews).

Debate doesn't need to be completely free on this site. From the FAQs:
It's free speech, so I can post whatever I like here, right?
Ahahahaha! Hahaha! Free speech! No, it's not. I run this web site, see, so you have to play by my rules. It's like my own Father Knows Best state.
[…]
What can't I post?
Any content that is:
  • obscene
  • illegal
  • threatening
  • malicious
  • defamatory
  • spam


Pretty sure Thanks to Reppy, now absolutely certain that reasons you'd like to murder X-group -- no matter how eruditely phrased -- would come under one of those categories (possibly malicious and/or threatening, depending on how you put it).

Again, these are the terms you signed on for. Which is why I always suggest reading conditions before you register for a website. I'm sure there are many out there that allow you (general "you") to discuss reasons for killing X-group.
Last edited by The Free Joy State on Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If there's a book that you want to read, but it hasn't been written yet, then you must write it." - Toni Morrison

My nation does not represent my beliefs or politics.

User avatar
Qwertyuioplkjhgfd
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: Jun 15, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Qwertyuioplkjhgfd » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:15 pm

Reploid Productions wrote:
Mexican Liberation wrote:
You actually CAN debate that stuff. There have been a LOT of controversial debates on this site. You're probably worried about offending the entire community right? No one here is offended by that stuff, they only get offended when someone doesn't cite their sources or makes it into a rant instead of an actual debate question (eg. I think this is good because this is good.).

Eh... actually, there is no way to argue in favor of killing <IRL group> that isn't considered trolling. Because pretty much any way you say it, "members of X group should die/be killed/etc" is an inflammatory statement that runs afoul of one or more of the big six guidelines that the site rules are derived from:
What can't I post?

Any content that is:
  • obscene
  • illegal
  • threatening
  • malicious
  • defamatory
  • spam


Then can homosexuality be discussed? Some people would think discussing that is trolling and no way can you discuss that because homosexuality like race or religious to an extent can't be controlled. To some, there is no way of saying it's wrong and a sin to be gay without be threatening. But this is not the death of homosexuals. Just if it's a sin, which that cannot be discussed, or can it?

User avatar
Kyrusia
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 9458
Founded: Nov 12, 2007
Capitalizt

Postby Kyrusia » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:15 pm

Qwertyuioplkjhgfd wrote:...just because it is controversial.

You can discuss all manner of controversial topics.* How you discuss it, however, matters, and it's your responsibility to ensure it adheres to our rules that you agreed to adhere to upon the moment of account creation. The onus is on you to follow the rules, and us to enforce them.

*The only "topic" that has a general moratorium in NSG is pedophilia, as I recall.
Last edited by Kyrusia on Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.
One Stop Rules Shop | RP Mentors | FT Advice & Assistance Thread | FT: Helpful Links
Senior Game Moderator and Senior N&I Roleplay Mentor specializing in Future Technology. Ask away!
"Kyrusia. Brooding, irrepressible, immeasurable." — The United Dominion

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Moderation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Greater vakolicci haven

Advertisement

Remove ads