A couple of Amendments

• Episkey wrote on 2012-05-14 04:57
  Hello everyone! It's Episkey here! :hi:
  
  I've recently realized a few things that should be added to the rules ... for clarity purposes.
  Here are my suggestions.
  
  First off, before continuing further - READ THIS!
  None of what I'm about to say will make sense if you don't read that thread. Seriously, I'm not joking. You will simply waste your time if you don't read that thread.
  
  ...
  
  Are you done? Good. Now, I can get started with my proposed amendments.
  
  
  Amendment One
  
  Do not engage in the selling of in-game services or items for real life money.
  
  
  This has been kind of an unspoken rule since the beginning of time, yet I'm surprised to see no mention of it in the Rules.
  Moderators have told people that they can't do it, but without this being in the rules - how would anyone know?
  
  Well, I mean ... this is a rule - right? Or is it something judged on an individual basis?
  
  Best make a clear stance on it and avoid future problems.
  
  
  EDIT: There is a rule already against this, but it only is present in the Rule announcement of the Market sections of the forums. Therefore, this should be made more visible to everyone.
  
  
  Amendment Two
  
  Do not create threads whose sole purpose is to ask for forum reputation and/or forum gold.
  
  
  I'm not talking about using forum gold as payment for something like a work of art. I'm talking about just straight up - asking for forum gold or reputation.
  
  Simply put, forum gold can be used for a variety of benefits and the sudden acquisition of a large quantity of forum gold can be used to buy said benefits.
  
  It discourages community involvement, seeking to reap the "benefits" with little to no contribution.
  
  Reputation falls under the same category.
  
  Reputation is supposed to be a way to distinguish which users are most trustworthy or have done the most contributions. Although you can make the argument that reputation holds no such significance anymore, to which I would agree with, the purpose of reputation system should still be respected. Otherwise, why even have said system to begin with?
  
  In addition, Reputation also has the ability to - AH! ... That was a close one. Almost said that one out loud.
  
  Phew.~
  
  
  Amendment Three
  
  Add a table or chart that indications the severity of infractions.
  
  
  To the best of my knowledge, Mabination works off a "point based" infraction system.
  Once you accumulate a certain amount of points, you get a respective punishment (usually a temporary ban).
  
  Now, some actions automatically result in a permanent ban - I recognize that.
  
  However, I'm a believer in deterrence. If a user could look up how many "points" he had before a punishment occurred, they would be more likely to try and avoid reaching that point.
  
  "Oh wow. I'm really close to getting a 3-day ban ... I should really shape up!"
  
  I think it will be very beneficial, at it's best.
  At its worst, a chart or table won't do anyone any harm. I mean, no one is going to deliberately break the rules because of it. People break the rules because people break the rules, the chart is simply there to try and prevent people from doing as such.
  
  
  Amendment Four
  
  This is my last suggestion and I'm sure everyone will be united concerning this amendment.
  
  My last amendment is to ...
  
  Restore the old forum curse-word censor.
  
  Yes, I've noticed an alarming rise in the amount of profanities used. Now, wherein the usage of profanity is currently alright according to the rules ...
  
  

  Do not use excessive profanities on the forum. The censors have been removed and you are now trusted to use your vocabulary responsibly.

  
  
  Excessive profanity is not. Now, you might say ...
  
  "But Episkey! I haven't been seeing excessive profanity!?!"
  
  I would have to vehemently disagree. Go ahead and search common curse words on the search bar.
  In most cases, the first 5 pages of threads that contain that curse word - are all under 1 to 2 weeks old. If that doesn't indicate a potential alarming frequency of course words ...
  
  However! My point lies deeper than simply using curse words a lot. In your search of curse words ... didn't you notice something else?
  
  Perhaps certain thread titles coming up repeatedly? .. And their current state?
  
  To be blunt, an alarming number of locked threads (due to members fighting) contained many curse words. This is also ignoring the fact that some threads are outright deleted, to which I can attest - most of the time contains a large amount of profanity.
  
  The issue with profanity is that is simply creates conflict. It may not be apparent in the conscious level, but seeing someone expressing or refuting viewpoints using profanity creates a barrier between both users. It creates conflict between the users and it usually ends up being a shouting fest ...
  
  I don't believe a responsible usage of vocabulary is prevalent among most members of Mabination. Expressing your views via cursing may not always be beneficial - if less instances of fighting can result from this, then I think it should be implemented with due haste.
  
  Mabination was just fine with a word censor, I don't see how it's existence could have any negative impact. Sure, personal "freedom" may be restricted - but if you are so concerned about that ... then why even have rules to begin with?
  
  Rules are in place to avoid conflict. Excessive profanity causes conflict. The solution is obvious, it may be temporary - until spoken otherwise. However, something needs to be done about this issue.
  
  
  
  In any case, Thanks for reading!
• Invertex wrote on 2012-05-14 05:03
  Well, in regards to some points.
  
  Amendment One
  There is a written rule for this. If you check the rules under the Mabinogi Town Square sections, there's a second post with the Market Rules.
  However it's hard to find, not present in the Vindictus section, and often overlooked. We're aware of it and working on fixing that now so it's harder to miss.
  
  Just an example, this is the Alexina sub forum. http://mabination.com/announcement.php?f=22
  
  Amendment 2
  This likely falls under the following rule.
  

  •A lack of the finer social graces or simply ignorance is no excuse for posting blatantly offensive and/or intolerant messages or bluntly in a manner that could be considered in poor taste (at the Staff's discretion).

  
  
  Amendment 3
  I like the idea, but I can't say for sure if we'll do it or not.
  
  Amendment 4
  This has been discussed and debated time and time again. It'll likely stay as it is.
• Cannibal wrote on 2012-05-14 05:05
  For the first one, it actually is in the rules. People just miss it... a lot. Scroll down. This was actually brought up by another staff member the other day, because very few people actually know it's there. I'm pretty sure sometime soon it's going to be integrated into the normal rules post, since that's what me and said staff member had discussed.
  
  The second one happens so rarely that I don't really see a need for it to be a rule. Threads made for that purpose are usually nuked in a few minutes, so unless it became some huge problem where people were making these threads all over the place, it's probably not something that needs to be addressed in the rules.
  
  As for the third, that's actually a really good idea. I remember it being posted a while ago, but it could definitely use a refresher, as I think the system has been updated since then... I'll actually start working on a thread and bring it up with the staff, considering those are things that you guys should have the right to know.
  
  I don't have any comments on the third, except that I wish it was a choice whether or not people could use it.
• MareneCorp wrote on 2012-05-14 05:06
  I'd agree with most of these amendments, 1-3 would really clear up some things on the forum here, but I guess the last one is more of a maturity level kind of thing. We ARE a 16+ content forum now, so peope should be expected to be mature. It's really up to the mods to decide whether to infract someone for profanity or not.
• Ithiliel wrote on 2012-05-14 05:07
  I have to agree with Invertex. I do think that the censor needs to be changed to add in more derogatory terms, but as for "shit, fuck, etc" those would likely stay as those don't cause as many issues as the usage of derogatory terms.
  
  Amendment 3? I would say that's a great idea, since people seem to be unsure, though if people get too close to being banned I warn them about it in my infractions/warnings.
• Episkey wrote on 2012-05-14 05:14

  Quote from Invertex;863244:

  
  
  Amendment One
  There is a written rule for this. If you check the rules under the Mabinogi Town Square sections, there's a second post with the Market Rules.
  However it's hard to find, not present in the Vindictus section, and often overlooked. We're aware of it and working on fixing that now so it's harder to miss.

  
  
  I see.
  
  So long as you guys are working on fixing that - it's fine. However, yeah - it's not found in the Rule Announcement ... so it is likely to be missed.
  
  

  Quote from Invertex;863244:

  
  Amendment 2
  This likely falls under the following rule.

  
  
  The issue with that stance is that you already know of the rule beforehand. It's a bias - so to speak.
  
  Imagine yourself as a new member, you wouldn't know something like that was frowned upon.
  
  Maybe the see a new pet they want or an upgrade ... I can think of many situations.
  
  

  Quote from Invertex;863244:

  
  Amendment 4
  This has been discussed and debated time and time again. It'll likely stay as it is.

  
  
  Has there been any recent discussion? If so, please direct me to it.
  
  Past discussion is somewhat a moot point - because the situation has changed. I also see why it will "stay as it is", realizing that for the longest time ... there was indeed a word censor present.
  
  

  Quote from MareneCorp;863246:

  We ARE a 16+ content forum now, so peope should be expected to be mature. It's really up to the mods to decide whether to infract someone for profanity or not.

  
  
  I'm not intent on babying anyone, so I partially agree with you.
  
  However, I think avoiding to have to reach that point of passing out infractions is important - the damage has already been done.
  Infractions is just the aftermath and trying to prevent it from happening again. So, why make it happen the first time?
  
  
  

  Quote from Ithiliel;863247:

  I have to agree with Invertex. I do think that the censor needs to be changed to add in more derogatory terms, but as for "shit, fuck, etc" those would likely stay as those don't cause as many issues as the usage of derogatory terms.

  
  
  What derogatory terms could you possibly have in mind? You don't have to write them obviously ...
  
  But I mean, the intentions behind the words are still there. If someone says "f' you" - then they still did a personal attack against a person.
  
  Curse words make such attacks easier to do.
• Ithiliel wrote on 2012-05-14 05:20

  Quote from Episkey;863252:

  
  What derogatory terms could you possibly have in mind? You don't have to write them obviously ...
  
  But I mean, the intentions behind the words are still there. If someone says "f' you" - then they still did a personal attack against a person.
  
  Curse words make such attacks easier to do.

  
  
  If someone is saying, "F you" to you in a thread that's flaming and should be reported. We don't tolerate that. But someone saying, "Well I don't know what the fuck is going on" etc is fine. As for derogatory terms, let me get back to you when I'm not so tired.
• Episkey wrote on 2012-05-14 05:21
  Great timing on my part! XD
  
  So many mods online ... Why you guiz so late at night? T_T
  
  

  Quote from ★;863245:

  For the first one, it actually is in the rules. People just miss it... a lot. Scroll down. This was actually brought up by another staff member the other day, because very few people actually know it's there. I'm pretty sure sometime soon it's going to be integrated into the normal rules post, since that's what me and said staff member had discussed.

  
  
  Good good. Sorry that I missed your post, it wasn't there before - I promise!
  
  

  Quote from ★;863245:

  
  The second one happens so rarely that I don't really see a need for it to be a rule. Threads made for that purpose are usually nuked in a few minutes, so unless it became some huge problem where people were making these threads all over the place, it's probably not something that needs to be addressed in the rules.

  
  
  I don't know about that. The frequency may be low - but if a Mod didn't "nuke" it right there and then, people may have already responded.
  
  Whether the response be positive or negative is also something to think about.
  
  
  

  Quote from ★;863245:

  
  As for the third, that's actually a really good idea. I remember it being posted a while ago, but it could definitely use a refresher, as I think the system has been updated since then... I'll actually start working on a thread and bring it up with the staff, considering those are things that you guys should have the right to know.

  
  
  I'm happy to see that my third idea is being accepted.
  
  Please do make that suggestion. I can see good things happen.
  
  

  Quote from ★;863245:

  
  I don't have any comments on the third, except that I wish it was a choice whether or not people could use it.

  
  
  Were you referring to my fourth idea? Could you possibly expand upon this?
  
  What did you mean by a choice?
  
  

  Quote from Ithiliel;863255:

  If someone is saying, "F you" to you in a thread that's flaming and should be reported. We don't tolerate that. But someone saying, "Well I don't know what the fuck is going on" etc is fine. As for derogatory terms, let me get back to you when I'm not so tired.

  
  
  Alright. I understand the difference.
  
  I just believe based off my own experience and research, that curse words seem to ... enable our members to make that "personal attack" easier.
• Cannibal wrote on 2012-05-14 05:24
  Ah yeah, I meant the fourth. Ignore me!
  
  By choice, I mean I wish people could choose between using the filter and not using it.
  
  For example, someone with the filter off would see:
  What the fuck?
  
  Someone with it on would see:
  What the f***/****/fu*k... something like that.
  
  Don't know if something like that is even possible... but it'd be nice.
• Episkey wrote on 2012-05-14 05:27

  Quote from ★;863258:

  
  Don't know if something like that is even possible... but it'd be nice.

  
  
  I had a feeling that's what you meant.
  Although, an optional word filter? I hadn't thought of that ... but, would it really change much?
  
  The person cursing is still cursing away - the only benefit I see is towards the recipient. If and only if, that recipient has the word filter on.
  It's a step in the right direction - sure! But, I don't think it'll change much.
• Invertex wrote on 2012-05-14 05:31

  Quote from Episkey;863252:

  The issue with that stance is that you already know of the rule beforehand. It's a bias - so to speak.
  
  Imagine yourself as a new member, you wouldn't know something like that was frowned upon.
  
  Maybe the see a new pet they want or an upgrade ... I can think of many situations.

  
  
  I think it's sort of common etiquite not to beg for things over the internet. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's what I've always assumed.
  
  

  Quote from Episkey;863252:

  Has there been any recent discussion? If so, please direct me to it.
  
  Past discussion is somewhat a moot point - because the situation has changed. I also see why it will "stay as it is", realizing that for the longest time ... there was indeed a word censor present.

  
  
  I'm trying to find the topics right now. Most of these occured right after the rules were changed around, mostly back in March. If that's recent enough, I'll continue to try to find the posts (as they're not located in dedicated topics). Though I'm fairly certain that most people were actually arguing for a complete removal of the censor as well.
  
  Edit: Here, some of what I remember.
  
  http://mabination.com/threads/51400-Grievance-towards-one-of-our-rules-(Warning-Bad-words)
  http://mabination.com/threads/50766-Suggestion-for-optional-censorship
• Episkey wrote on 2012-05-14 05:37

  Quote from Invertex;863264:

  I think it's sort of common etiquite not to beg for things over the internet. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's what I've always assumed.

  
  
  Ah no, I agree. Maybe it's my past years of playing Runescape that causes me to have my negative opinion on the matter. (People always begging for stuff ... *grumble* *grumble*)
  
  I try not to make assumptions on something like this, because - it has happened before.
  
  

  Quote from Invertex;863264:

  
  I'm trying to find the topics right now. Most of these occured right after the rules were changed around, mostly back in March. If that's recent enough, I'll continue to try to find the posts (as they're not located in dedicated topics). Though I'm fairly certain that most people were actually arguing for a complete removal of the censor as well.

  
  
  March? ... Ehhh.
  I'll look as well, but my point is more recent.
  
  As in, after the word censor got removed. Since then, I believe that people have been generally not being "responsible" with their vocabulary usage.
• Invertex wrote on 2012-05-14 05:45

  Quote from Episkey;863269:

  March? ... Ehhh.
  I'll look as well, but my point is more recent.
  
  As in, after the word censor got removed. Since then, I believe that people have been generally not being "responsible" with their vocabulary usage.

  
  
  My main disagreement with this point is that the words themselves don't spark the arguements. Saying "You're an idiot cause [Blank]" versus "You're a fucking idiot cause [Blank]". Simply put people will continue to argue like this, filters in place or not.
  
  Of course this is simply my view on it. The problem here is that everyone has a different opinion on profanities. Some people just use it so often that they actually have to make an effort to not use them, while some people refrain from using them at all. For the 16+ age group that this forum is for, more people will fall into the former. This is just one of those topics that it's really impossible to consider one opinion as being more correct than another, so we end up siding with the majority.
  
  As a side note: I do believe this marks the first post on Nation in which I swear.
• Episkey wrote on 2012-05-14 06:04

  Quote from Invertex;863264:

  
  http://mabination.com/threads/51400-Grievance-towards-one-of-our-rules-(Warning-Bad-words)

  
  
  I remember reading this thread. However, this seems to be talking about being uniform in determining what is derogatory or not.
  
  I suppose this is just testament to Lilith's point about including more things in our word censor.
  If anything, this thread enforces the need for censorship.
  
  

  Quote from Invertex;863264:

  
  http://mabination.com/threads/50766-Suggestion-for-optional-censorship

  
  
  The thread ended with a "Oh we can't do it right now - so tough luck." vibe.
  
  The issue is ... well, it's an issue. As in right now.
  
  You don't say to yourself, "Oh I called 911 - until they arrive I won't do anything about this medical emergency."
  If you are bleeding due to a laceration, you are going to do your best to try and stop the bleeding.
  
  It's an analogy, but the same concept applies.
  
  
  

  Quote from Invertex;863275:

  My main disagreement with this point is that the words themselves don't spark the arguements. Saying "You're an idiot cause [Blank]" versus "You're a fucking idiot cause [Blank]". Simply put people will continue to argue like this, filters in place or not.

  
  
  In actuality, I do agree with your point.
  Whether or not there is a filter, people will argue. Yes, I understand that - though try and see past that.
  
  It's ALOT easier to spark an argument with someone by cursing at them than by any other means.
  Cursing is quick, effective, and serves to "enhance" your post. The issue arises that these curse words impact the reader more - causing them less likely to academically and properly discuss their views.
  
  "If they start cursing me out, then I'll do the same."
  
  Sure, Moderators will take care of any fight ... but I'm talking about preventing that and keeping User relations sound. We don't have to be all buddy-buddy, but curse words shouldn't cause such divides and fights ... which they have.
  
  It'll only make everyone's life easier.
  
  

  Quote from Invertex;863275:

  
  Of course this is simply my view on it. The problem here is that everyone has a different opinion on profanities. Some people just use it so often that they actually have to make an effort to not use them, while some people refrain from using them at all. For the 16+ age group that this forum is for, more people will fall into the former. This is just one of those topics that it's really impossible to consider one opinion as being more correct than another, so we end up siding with the majority.

  
  
  Your view is your view, yes. And as a member of these forums, you have every right to have your opinion heard.
  Which, applies to everyone else as well. I'm sure you know that - but this isn't something that can be decided simply due to "Majority".
  
  A consensus must be reached then, if people don't wish to give up their right to swear! ... Wow. That's retrospectively quite silly.
  
  I'm willing to agree with adding more words to the word censor, since I do believe it needs an adjustment.
• Invertex wrote on 2012-05-14 06:33

  Quote from Episkey;863290:

  In actuality, I do agree with your point.
  Whether or not there is a filter, people will argue. Yes, I understand that - though try and see past that.
  
  It's ALOT easier to spark an argument with someone by cursing at them than by any other means.
  Cursing is quick, effective, and serves to "enhance" your post. The issue arises that these curse words impact the reader more - causing them less likely to academically and properly discuss their views.
  
  "If they start cursing me out, then I'll do the same."
  
  Sure, Moderators will take care of any fight ... but I'm talking about preventing that and keeping User relations sound. We don't have to be all buddy-buddy, but curse words shouldn't cause such divides and fights ... which they have.
  
  It'll only make everyone's life easier.

  
  
  I'm only replying to this as I feel this is the core of the arguement right now, everything else sort of stems from this.
  
  I simply don't feel that swearing actually acts as a catalyst for fights. If I can use the analogy of which comes first, the chicken or the egg: the question here is really if the swearing or the fighting comes first. My opinion is that the swearing simply comes out of the negativity, and the negativity is really what causes further arguements.
  
  I can see why you think the two feed into each other though, but I still believe that the majority of the arguements that have broken out have not been because of the swearing. It's all simply due to other things people just can't put aside.
  
  But I will admit I am terrible at arguing for or against a censor, simply because I am neutral about these things.