Mordhau

Kicking/Banning Toxic ppl has nothing to do with SJW or Political Correctness.

1908 1995
  • 21 Jul '19
 SWSeriousMike

@ShapiroLibtardsDieTwice said:
Did I say anything about facism, communism, or said, "All niggers should burn" is not racist? Did I say that you're a pussy and I'm a bad ass? No. Did I say anything about Freedom of speech? You're simply putting words into my mouth now. I have my basis on why I believe moderation is not needed, if you want to choose not to believe that, that your opinion and I have my opinion. Did the community fail the devs? No, the devs failed the community. You're chess example is just comical and untangible for this discussion that I'm not even going to bother. I'll be laughing when people get around the cancerous chat filters.

I'm not putting words in your mouth. I just gave you a list of the arguments against moderation presented on this forum. If you hadn't been so preoccupied with trying to "win" this discussion you would have noticed that.

Simple approaches like word filters won't address the underlying problem. The negative publicity probably will keep coming until the community deals with trolls with vote kicks instead of ignorance and moderation efforts are upped.

1596 1170
  • 1
  • 21 Jul '19
 esturias

@ZugZugNeverEnds said:
freedom of speech

Please don't use terms you don't understand. Wait until you get taught about that kind of thing at school.
Thank you.

4 5
  • 21 Jul '19
 nopinkcreations

Pretty sure its already been said but you can hide the chat or mute people in chat or change their messages to be preset encouraging messages instead.
"but i want to be able to read the rest of the chat and engage with my team" : Honestly, racism, toxicity, name-calling, abuse and random childish shit is ALL that is ever in chat. There are occasional messages like "balista in our spawn" or "username is teamkilling) but 99% of it is "ur mum ghey", "suck my ballsack you peurto rican whore" and not worth reading even without the n word. You really dont need to discuss tactics with your team because the maps are so simple and pretty much do lay everything out for you (not saying the game has not strategy to it just that its very straight forward strategy, no need to discuss it with your team). "but what about smaller game modes like skirmish" : Be on voice chat ofc. Use the mordhau discord server.

The "argument" of "its not censoring your freedom of speech because they as a company are legally aloud to do it" is flawed because its simply LEGALIZED silencing of people. Thats the only difference. Literally, they have a piece of paper saying they can do it, other than that its the same as them pretty much choosing who they want to speak and what they want them to say.

Knight 7768 14320
  • 21 Jul '19
 ToLazy4Name

"I don't care about property rights"

ok lol

181 165
  • 21 Jul '19
 Unlikely

@nopinkcreations said:

The "argument" of "its not censoring your freedom of speech because they as a company are legally aloud to do it" is flawed because its simply LEGALIZED silencing of people. Thats the only difference. Literally, they have a piece of paper saying they can do it, other than that its the same as them pretty much choosing who they want to speak and what they want them to say.

That's not the flaw in the argument, that IS the argument. You don't enjoy freedom of speech here, you have the privilege of speech within the rules set by the admins. Who, yes, literally have a piece of paper or two that say they own this forum and they can ban anyone they like for violating their rules. The same restrictions apply in your living room, which is also a private place where you decide who can stay and who can GTFO. If you're OK with the latter you don't have any valid complaint about the former.

1596 1170
  • 21 Jul '19
 esturias

@nopinkcreations said:
Pretty sure its already been said but you can hide the chat or mute people in chat or change their messages to be preset encouraging messages instead.

That has been said many times. It also got commented many times.

"but i want to be able to read the rest of the chat and engage with my team" : Honestly, racism, toxicity, name-calling, abuse and random childish shit is ALL that is ever in chat. There are occasional messages like "balista in our spawn" or "username is teamkilling) but 99% of it is [nonsense].

It's not THAT bad, but... yes. The vast majority is nonsense. But there are still people who can use the chat quite normally.

The "argument" of "its not censoring your freedom of speech because they as a company are legally aloud to do it" is flawed because its simply LEGALIZED silencing of people.

People don't even understand what "freedom of speech" is and they constantly confuse it with the self-entitled right to behave like asocial brats, so that entire talk is pointless anyway.

1908 1995
  • 22 Jul '19
 SWSeriousMike

@nopinkcreations said:
Pretty sure its already been said but you can hide the chat or mute people in chat or change their messages to be preset encouraging messages instead.
"but i want to be able to read the rest of the chat and engage with my team" : Honestly, racism, toxicity, name-calling, abuse and random childish shit is ALL that is ever in chat. There are occasional messages like "balista in our spawn" or "username is teamkilling) but 99% of it is "ur mum ghey", "suck my ballsack you peurto rican whore" and not worth reading even without the n word. You really dont need to discuss tactics with your team because the maps are so simple and pretty much do lay everything out for you (not saying the game has not strategy to it just that its very straight forward strategy, no need to discuss it with your team). "but what about smaller game modes like skirmish" : Be on voice chat ofc. Use the mordhau discord server.

The "argument" of "its not censoring your freedom of speech because they as a company are legally aloud to do it" is flawed because its simply LEGALIZED silencing of people. Thats the only difference. Literally, they have a piece of paper saying they can do it, other than that its the same as them pretty much choosing who they want to speak and what they want them to say.

When people claim you are team killing, exploiting etc. and you don't even notice it, that's a problem. You have no way to defend yourself and can get vote-kicked from the server.
You are free to disable your chat. Nobody wants to take that away from you. But that doesn't deal with the problem the community has.

By the way, on the community servers there is a lot of talk that isn't toxic. People that know each other are greeting each other. Discussions about weapons and counter to specific setups are discussed. Opinions are exchanged. Beginners ask for tips, veterans sometimes provide help. All that is possible because the chat isn't drowned in verbal excrement, because community servers are moderated.

Knight 7768 14320
  • 22 Jul '19
 ToLazy4Name

@SWSeriousMike said:
By the way, on the community servers there is a lot of talk that isn't toxic. People that know each other are greeting each other. Discussions about weapons and counter to specific setups are discussed. Opinions are exchanged. Beginners ask for tips, veterans sometimes provide help. All that is possible because the chat isn't drowned in verbal excrement, because community servers are moderated.

This is without a doubt true, but the question is what is better: impersonal automated measures that may or may not backfire, or simply (for the most part) leaving it in the hands of the players? Private servers are almost invariably a few servers at most and are much easier to moderate because of that. Unless the devs start adding alot more moderators, the only options they have other than client-side options are automated measures. I'm of the opinion that improving their existing moderation options (streamlining the reporting process and shit) and giving players lots of client-side toggles is the best way to go about this, though if they add alot more admins they can make me an admin and then everything will be good

1908 1995
  • 22 Jul '19
 SWSeriousMike

@ToLazy4Name said:
This is without a doubt true, but the question is what is better: impersonal automated measures that may or may not backfire, or simply (for the most part) leaving it in the hands of the players? Private servers are almost invariably a few servers at most and are much easier to moderate because of that. Unless the devs start adding alot more moderators, the only options they have other than client-side options are automated measures. I'm of the opinion that improving their existing moderation options (streamlining the reporting process and shit) and giving players lots of client-side toggles is the best way to go about this, though if they add alot more admins they can make me an admin and then everything will be good

I think lenient automated measures can aid in the moderation. Also some community guidelines about what is considered adequate and what inadequate would be nice. The rules are not very verbose. Everyone draws their personal line at a different point.

An example like:

"'Burn all niggers' is inadequate. Please vote to kick people writing that from the servers. If the vote fails and/or said user wrote that or similar hateful messages multiple times, report them."

would at least reduce the never-ending discussions about whether that behavior is welcome or not. No more "but others wrote worse and haven't been punished".

I'd also like the forum bans to be public and visible.
"[User] is banned for [time] because of comments made in the following threads: [list of threads]."

I'd even like flags for posts:
"This comment has been marked as inadequate."

That way they can distance themselves from this stuff without censoring anything.

Word filters won't increase transparency, which is what is lacking more than personnel in my opinion.

181 165
  • 22 Jul '19
 Unlikely

@SWSeriousMike said:

I'd also like the forum bans to be public and visible.
"[User] is banned for [time] because of comments made in the following threads: [list of threads]."

I'd even like flags for posts:
"This comment has been marked as inadequate."

That way they can distance themselves from this stuff without censoring anything.

I like the idea of making the bans transparent. It would save us the work of reporting someone who's already been permanently banned, which I hope is the case for the suddenly silent @616RexFortis, who was clearly trying to get banned (or to prove that no one ever will be).

I reject the idea that any of this is censorship, for the reasons we've stated over and over and over again. The claims of censorship are coming from people who aren't here to listen to you.

783 336
  • 22 Jul '19
 PC_Principal

Let's all keep talking about seemlingly political content instead of talking about how we can improve the game or what content should be added.

181 165
  • 22 Jul '19
 Unlikely

@PC_Principal:

Let's all keep talking about seemlingly political content instead of talking about how we can improve the game or what content should be added.

Running the racist trolls out IS improving the game, and I support the Mordhau team in the several steps they've taken in that direction.

783 336
  • 2
  • 22 Jul '19
 PC_Principal

I think censorship confirms them in their opinions though. For example, I don't think alex jones should have been deplatformed honestly. Everyone could tell the guy was nuts but he had some truths buried there, as turned out in the case of charlie epstein and his connections to wealthy politicians and hollywood.
It makes them hate the left even more and in my opinion we need less people like you who are trying to fight racism and more that are willing to debate it. In my opinion, censorship is always bad.

129 181
  • 22 Jul '19
 CatR

@PC_Principal said:
I think censorship confirms them in their opinions though. For example, I don't think alex jones should have been deplatformed honestly. Everyone could tell the guy was nuts but he had some truths buried there, as turned out in the case of charlie epstein and his connections to wealthy politicians and hollywood.
It makes them hate the left even more and in my opinion we need less people like you who are trying to fight racism and more that are willing to debate it. In my opinion, censorship is always bad.

... ... What..?

783 336
  • 22 Jul '19
 PC_Principal

What I'm trying to say is, antifascists tend to be very intolerant towards opinions and calling literally anyone a nazi / hate speech that believes in some kind of conspiracy or uses the wrong words or jokes. That's why the alex jones reference.
There's no normal conversation between an antifascist and someone who managed to think further than 2 boxes, the antifascist will tell you that pussy is a bad word because it discriminates women as a weak gender and is associated with weakness and how discriminatory use of language is the first step on the rape pyramid. (that 1 hour conversation with a hot anti chick happened because my dude called me a pussy because I didn't wanna drink his booze)

957 311
  • 23 Jul '19
 Antoniokontos

@Unlikely said:
@PC_Principal:

Let's all keep talking about seemlingly political content instead of talking about how we can improve the game or what content should be added.

Running the racist trolls out IS improving the game, and I support the Mordhau team in the several steps they've taken in that direction.

we should run you out for being hyper sensitive

1908 1995
  • 23 Jul '19
 SWSeriousMike

@PC_Principal said:
I think censorship confirms them in their opinions though.

Their opinions are set in stone already. It's not like they need confirmation for it.

For example, I don't think alex jones should have been deplatformed honestly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory#Alex_Jones_and_InfoWars
That shit could have ended in death and violence. He is not above the law and I can't blame sponsors for not wanting to pay him anymore.

Everyone could tell the guy was nuts but he had some truths buried there, as turned out in the case of charlie epstein and his connections to wealthy politicians and hollywood.

Some truths buried in there by random chance isn't really something that is desirable. Even a literal interpretation of the bible has some truths buried in it.

It makes them hate the left even more and in my opinion we need less people like you who are trying to fight racism and more that are willing to debate it.

What is there to debate about it? It doesn't have merit. Next we start to debate whether the Holocaust was a good thing or not.

In my opinion, censorship is always bad.

Then your opinion is bad. Private information has to be protected. Deleting spam is censorship. Incitement is also illegal - even in the US.
Do you have to be doxxed and spammed into oblivion before you can come to the conclusion that censorship is necessary sometimes? You refer to a site called infowars but somehow haven't realized that informational warfare is a real thing.

@PC_Principal said:
What I'm trying to say is, antifascists tend to be very intolerant towards opinions and calling literally anyone a nazi / hate speech that believes in some kind of conspiracy or uses the wrong words or jokes. That's why the alex jones reference.
There's no normal conversation between an antifascist and someone who managed to think further than 2 boxes, the antifascist will tell you that pussy is a bad word because it discriminates women as a weak gender and is associated with weakness and how discriminatory use of language is the first step on the rape pyramid. (that 1 hour conversation with a hot anti chick happened because my dude called me a pussy because I didn't wanna drink his booze)

What kind of mental gymnastics did you have to perform to think that opposing fascism is a bad thing? Do you long for the jolly good time that was WWII? Now with even more fun because everyone can have nukes.

1596 1170
  • 3
  • 23 Jul '19
 esturias

@PC_Principal said:
I think censorship confirms them in their opinions though.

Who cares about their opinions?

In my opinion, censorship is always bad.

That's right if you are talking about the kind of censorship that got/gets used by all kinds of totalitarian governments, dictatorships and whatnot, but removing toxic, racist and other kinds of asocial people still isn't censorship. Or at least you can't compare it with that kind of censorship that people fight across the world.

46 74
  • 1
  • 23 Jul '19
 Zeratul

@esturias said:

@PC_Principal said:
I think censorship confirms them in their opinions though.

Who cares about their opinions?

In my opinion, censorship is always bad.

That's right if you are talking about the kind of censorship that got/gets used by all kinds of totalitarian governments, dictatorships and whatnot, but removing toxic, racist and other kinds of asocial people still isn't censorship. Or at least you can't compare it with that kind of censorship that people fight across the world.

Its the same mentality. Writing nigger in a chatbox, is neither racist or hateful, its just some dude writing nigger in a chatbox. There is no value to it. How would you even define what is exactly racist toxic or asocial, and why such people should be removed? You calling for removing these people is a clearly totalitarian mindset. They dont comfirm with your standard, so they have to be removed. Thats really dangerous right here. So yeah you can compare it, as its pretty much the same.