Exilian
Site Questions & Governance: The Citadel Quarter => Questions and Suggestions - The High Court => The Grand Tribunal => Topic started by: Clockwork on February 27, 2016, 11:44:41 AM
-
An image I posted was taken down on 26/02/2016 in the thread Funny Picture Thread by moderator Gmd. Reason given is section 4 of ToS - Spamming.
Under the definition I can't have been spamming because it would require intentionally antagonising another member or for personal gain. I could have gained nothing other than post count which clearly isn't the issue because part of the post is still there and I haven't obviously antagonised anyone because there hasn't been an angry response post which would be an indicator.
The post was not unsuitable for the thread, it was obviously a funny picture.
It wasn't political.
It wasn't unintelligible.
It was in English.
It was a single post.
I have never cared about post count as supported by my lack of participation in post-count-boosting forum games.
There was no malicious intent to incite flame/forum wars. Indeed, no replies to it were made other than a removal.
I wasn't advertising anything.
It wasn't parasitic.
It didn't contain a link to a product.
-
Ah armadillo now I'm going to have to read the ToS.
Edit:
What would you say you actually found humorous about the picture?
-
The particular photo combined with the wordplay.
-
I found it funny. :)
-
Yeah me too. I think it could be misconstrued as politically sensitive because of stereotypical black kid name + subject matter, but that seems very tenuous to me. You could say it was unsuitable for the area since anything making light of rape is kind of a bit unsuitable for a forum that strives to be inclusive (and has to accommodate for children I think?), although to me it was the pun itself that was funny, not the subject matter. I don't really give many portugals tbh but I suppose it was best to take the photo down since it could reasonably be seen as being callous towards rape victims. Clockwork hasn't actually been warned or punished in any way for posting it so there's no harm done, except harm to the notion of freedom of expression but I reckon notions have pretty tough skins.
-
So did it breach political sensitivity? My perspective is that the joke would work with any race.
-
Nah, I'd say it doesn't breach section 4 but it would fall under section 8 - that is inappropriate content. I'm not sure where the line is drawn on what counts as inappropriate content, (personally I like my humour to be completely inappropriate) and I'm happy to hear from the rest of the community on this.
-
In the efforts of clarity and in an act to 'show all my cards', I'm going to explain the two problems I had with the image. I know one to be subjective, and that policing on subjective opinion will always leave people upset one way or the other, but I think the other can be something fairly universally agreed upon.
My first problem, the subjective one, is that I personally found it offensive. I don't think serious, violent crime (rape, assault, murder, etc.) has much place being a punchline. But, like I said, this is totally subjective - everyone has a different threshold on what is 'offensive' and how far a boundary can be pushed before it goes too far. For me, it was too far. It was, at the very least, incredibly tasteless.
I think the more common problem, insofar as 'inappropriate content' goes, is that we are a community. For certain, seeing such images come up makes me feel on the outside of that community (which is, again subjective) - I think the objective bit comes in that we shouldn't, and I believe for the most part don't, want to present that kind of image to the outsider. We all want to enrich this community, right? We actively want more members, more contribution, more of that sense of camaraderie (although, I suppose, what kind of contribution you want to make and what kind of community you want this to be is a strong indicator of which side you'll take in this debate).
For the second reason, I think the mod was right to step in. I think I should make clear once again that "I'm offended" is not the same as "it's offensive" - however just because I was offended does not mean that the mod should or shouldn't have stepped in. They *should* have stepped in - because it's their responsibility to help enrich the community.
As a side note, the issue of free speech goes both ways - just as you have every right to post whatever you want, other people have the right to not listen. Although, I do think the mod should have contacted the poster directly and explained exactly why they were taking the action they did.
-
Cool this was a nice display of how this system works. I'm happy to refrain from posting violent crime jokes, I didn't even think twice before posting it tbh but I can moderate whatever I post later.
-
Well I feel that I have set a truly exemplary example of how justice should be upheld. Do we have to wait for croat fan to weigh in before the case is closed?
-
(and has to accommodate for children I think?)
I'm pretty sure the official age limit, like most other forums and social media, is 13.
Although, I do think the mod should have contacted the poster directly and explained exactly why they were taking the action they did.
I absolutely agree with this, and I think this should be brought up with the plaza.
Well I feel that I have set a truly exemplary example of how justice should be upheld. Do we have to wait for croat fan to weigh in before the case is closed?
I haven't read the Constitution for a while, but I think it would be good to confirm he doesn't disagree with the judgement.
-
Do we have to wait for croat fan to weigh in before the case is closed?
Strictly speaking, yes:
11 b) The Tribounoi will decide on such appeals; where they disagree, the Sebastokrator will have the casting vote. If no Tribounoi are in office the decision is the sole responsibility of the Sebastokrator.
-
Croat fan found the original video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8E29c3a_5iE and as you can see the kids name is brian not tyrone, and the quoted exchange never took place, so I think it could be breaching the political insensitivity thing. Also I wouldn't want to misrepresent brian, he seems like a solid chap.
-
I agree with Pentagathus.
-
So do I.
-
http://exilian.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=1143.0
Your next job is to give the thread one of the prefixes from the link above^
-
I don't think it was half as bad as some of the stuff they do on Family Guy, and that's a prime time TV show with maybe a 14+ age rating, and that's when they bother to display a warning.
-
I'm going with [Resolved] because it looks nicer than the others.
Edit:
Actually I don't seem to be able to rename the thread.
-
Also just btw what I was originally reprimanded for was the wrong thing. So in a way I was right to challenge it.
-
Yeah man, I don't even know if it was strictly speaking against the ToS. We should probably expand on the inappropriate content section or add a guide somewhere as to what may constitute inappropriate content.
-
I'm going with [Resolved] because it looks nicer than the others.
Edit:
Actually I don't seem to be able to rename the thread.
Done for you, but There should be a modify button in the same place as on your own posts, and then you can do it from there - unless section mods don't have as much power as I thought...
-
Yes, you rename threads by modifying the original post. :)