This topic contains 83 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Loke 9 years, 3 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #52023

    Rommel
    Participant

    I checked out the link, but didn’t have a clue what I was supposed to think.@parasti wrote:

    @rommel wrote:

    The filter seems to me, to be a poor example to support any argument unless you are attempting to shut off the filter. There’s an idea I can support!

    Shameless plug.

    Seems neither of us are found of the current restrictions but instead of doing work on the code, I lean toward shutting it off entirely and letting the admins police the abusers.

    #52024

    parasti
    Participant

    In other words, “let’s make dealing with profanities in text chat analogous to dealing with profanities in players’ avatars”. Unsurprisingly, I don’t see that achieving anything apart from spawning more discussions like this with countless (and most of them valid) arguments for and against and often no decision made. I think that giving everyone the ability to choose for themselves is the only correct way of resolving the general issue.

    #52025

    bazzz
    Participant

    I was in beginners just now, and there was our naughty boy Kat Oberle.After i asked him if he was aware that some people were offended he asked me to make apologies on his behalf and assured me he would change his avatar today.

    #52026

    PeanutsRevenge
    Participant

    @bazzz wrote:

    I was in beginners just now, and there was our naughty boy Kat Oberle.After i asked him if he was aware that some people were offended he asked me to make apologies on his behalf and assured me he would change his avatar today.

    Doesn’t take much per player.

    Might help if their were clear and concise rules, not leaving it upto each admins personal interpretation of the rules to decide what is right and what is wrong.

    Thnx for speaking to the player Bazz.

    #52027

    Rommel
    Participant

    I see the problem but still feel that a “Not recommended for children” warning on the official servers solves the issue better than anything for the moment.@parasti wrote:

    In other words, “let’s make dealing with profanities in text chat analogous to dealing with profanities in players’ avatars”. Unsurprisingly, I don’t see that achieving anything apart from spawning more discussions like this with countless (and most of them valid) arguments for and against and often no decision made. I think that giving everyone the ability to choose for themselves is the only correct way of resolving the general issue.

    The issue of the offensive avatar seems to have been decided intelligently and the rules are, as expected, more than just a collection of words.

    Given the proper incentive, I can be very offensive without using profanity and in that regard the filter is a joke.

    The following text may be offensive :
    That is not my intention, but some things can’t be said painlessly.

      Although, “let he that is without sin cast the first stone” keeps ringing in my ears, “do as I say not as I do” is playing on this channel and I’m going to sing along too.

      It’s a little strange to me that some of the more adamant about the avatar being harmful to children, also seem to be the types of people that they wouldn’t want their children to chat with in the game, much less spend time with privately. Sex talk is sex talk gentlemen and being drunk is a poor excuse for anything other than being a drunk.

      The last time I checked sodomy was still widely considered an abomination unto God and an express ticket to hell. In contrast, viewing ourselves naked is fine. Funny stuff, and as I told shy yesterday, “You need to keep up in the forums shy, you’re missing out on about half the fun.”

    Something that hasn’t been considered publicly:

    The offender could be a female and those could be her breasts. If so, please forgive the insults madam, I think they are terrific, marvelous and perfect. Perhaps they wouldn’t have been so offensive if they weren’t so damn cute.

    Think about it,

    Rommel

    P.S. Perhaps this discussion could have been easily handled in house if we had an available method of reporting complaints to the admins collectively and privately. I’m pretty sure that the new PHP version I reported so very long ago offers a mailing list feature.

    #52028

    pastor of muppets
    Participant

    Touche Rom I try to be aware of who is in the room and know my audience. Fortunately there is an option to mute players and I have used it often when my kids are in the room.

    Bazzz tell kat ty if you see him again.

    #52029

    Thrax
    Participant

    I’m sure rom, should I made an avatar of my own chest, you would find
    it offensive for different reasons(mostly pure grotesque).

    As for warnings on servers, possibly. But the mains are the only ones
    needing it. Both for the language commonly used, and possible images.

    My own servers(Not just Kid-mod), are monitored closely by both myself
    directly and many publicly or privately deputized moderators. I clean up
    offensive players and images almost instantly, and as has been noticed..
    have a very thick filter.

    The only pure alternative to the avatar issue, would be to force a list of
    available avatars that would pre-empt any custom one’s on a mod.
    While some themed mod’s already do this, I’d hate to block out player
    creativity totally. However, it would only take a few moments to glean the
    entire list of known avatars of all players from the stats image cache, and
    lock them in; offering several hundred of the most common custom images.

    #52030

    pastor of muppets
    Participant

    Or we could say nudity is not allowed that might work too;)

    #52031

    PeanutsRevenge
    Participant

    @pastor of muppets wrote:

    Or we could say nudity is not allowed that might work too;)

    But the definition of nudity would need to be explained in the rules.

    As I have been TRYING, yet failing to point out it seems, Different people and cultures have different understandings of such things.
    In some places, noone wheres anything at all, in others, people (only women that I am aware of) are required to completely cover their bodies.

    So what would be the definition of nudity?
    Genitals, breasts, chest, legs (how much leg) arms, any skin including face?

    Would it be just humans? Im sure many would find an image of a mutilated dog far more offensive than a pair of breasts.
    As Thrax said and its something I probably agree with him on, an image of his chest is not something I would like to see.

    This, my fellow Scorchers, is the joy of international relations.

    #52032

    Loke
    Participant

    @peanutsrevenge wrote:

    @pastor of muppets wrote:

    Or we could say nudity is not allowed that might work too;)

    But the definition of nudity would need to be explained in the rules.

    Well done Nut, I really would like to see the answer to that one and backed by some convincing arguments. I wont even bring up the nudity – violence – children problem with this one;)

    Loke

Viewing 10 posts - 76 through 85 (of 85 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.