Danichi Itobar, on 04 October 2021 - 07:01 PM, said:
I commend you on your commitment to your values.
But
Sorry to say it, that's just how I am. That's how alot of us are. That's why the silent majority is silent so they don't get attacked for being that way. Me, I don't have the "shame" gene. I just wasn't born with it. If a group wants my support don't antagonize me, and I KNOW i'm not alone in my thinking. I don't clam to be a nice guy or pretend I want people to like me. But I am always honest and one always knows where they stand with me, that's the best I care to do. And if i'm unliked , well, then whatever, I have no use for that person in my life. The people who remain however have value to me and I have value to them. It's a lifestyle choice that doesn't oppress my true self.
Come to think about it, isn't that what this whole thing is about, being able to make lifestyle choices that don't oppress ones true self?
There's nothing wrong with taking the easiest, most comfortable route in life instead of confronting injustices to others that have no effect on you, and I'm not forcing you to change that lifestyle decision that you've already made, so there's no reason to infer that I'm somehow oppressing you by supporting the equal rights of others. I don't see why you should be ashamed of it and you already said you aren't, so it's not a problem. For you.
Danichi Itobar, on 04 October 2021 - 07:06 PM, said:
No, what happens when someone says something like that is they are bombarded with derogatory comments, racists and homophobic insults and call the N word over and over again. Here's the problem, where there is crap, flys will soon follow. I know people who play COD just to be able to scream racist remarks over the coms. I don't want those people here, and neither do you. Stuff like this is just bait for those crowds. :/
I said it in my first post in the announcement thread, I think. People like that love unmoderated spaces. I think one of the questions this thread should ask is if we are actually even being moderated or curated as a community with what we currently have, regardless of the terms of service that are already in place.
The current ToS seems pretty watertight. If you go into a match saying something that really, in its nature, isn't controversial then is it really an issue? If someone started every match with something weird like "I support equal rights for all" that would be really, really weird but would that person even be causing a controversy? Does anyone want to play the devil's advocate against the guy saying that he supports equal rights for all? We would need a true strawman-given-life (that holy **** sometimes does come crawling out of the woodwork) to suddenly respond to that by saying that some people deserve more rights than others.
Talking about gun laws, the governmental autonomy of various places in the world, tax law, presidential elections, etc. etc. in allchat definitely have enough sides and nuances to be controversial though.
So what comes to mind for me isn't a question of policy, but instead a question of who is responsible for enforcing that policy. It brings up questions about this current moderation incident, the incident with Veigle, and a little further back with Chaos Harmony. Were those community curations that met with the spirit and the writing of the ToS, or were they kind of arbitrary, confusing, and outraging to the community by how unexpectedly harsh, undiscussed, and out of the left field they were?
Edited by Commoners, 04 October 2021 - 07:22 PM.