NationStates Jolt Archive

what is this ?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=465066&page=7

Has the mod nothing better to do than to read deleted posts ?
And if this is cybersex, why are 70% of the posts are not closed ??

As I was -at least partially- responsible for the re-starting of this thread I feel obliged to say that I find the punishment a bit harsh...granted, these two (Hullepupp and Cabra West) were walking a thin line, but I have been treated to much harsher words in the past with no such results...e.g. being called a nazi just for being german. I don´t want to bring that up again, just for comparability. Also I think both have learned to restrain themselves. So, in comparison with other flaming punishments maybe the ban could be lessened...as a matter of equal justice.

If I see a deleted post marked "too heavy for kids" following a ream of illicit posts from the same poster, you bet I'm going to read it. The fact that Hullepupp deleted it doesn't change the fact that he posted it.

As for "restraining themselves", it's evident that Hullepupp did draw a line - he just drew it at the wrong place. The right place for that line is "none at all" when it comes to cybersex.

Unfortunately, comparing flaming and cybersex is rather like apples and oranges - they're different offences and are treated differently.

Hopefully that clears things up.

~ Tsar the Mod.

If I see a deleted post marked "too heavy for kids" following a ream of illicit posts from the same poster, you bet I'm going to read it. The fact that Hullepupp deleted it doesn't change the fact that he posted it.

As for "restraining themselves", it's evident that Hullepupp did draw a line - he just drew it at the wrong place. The right place for that line is "none at all" when it comes to cybersex.

Unfortunately, comparing flaming and cybersex is rather like apples and oranges - they're different offences and are treated differently.

Hopefully that clears things up.

~ Tsar the Mod.

Sorry, but what I don't really get is, why ban the two but leave their posts in the thread? :confused:

I understand the reasons of the mods, but I'd like to get their definition of cybersex

Wait....

There was cyber-sex posted and I missed it? :eek:

As would I. I understand that the mods do want to keep the forums relatively clean, but we must have a clear and concise definition of "Cybersex".

The last thing any of us want to do is get DEATed, and I'm sure the Mods hate DEATing someone. If we can get a clear line drawn in the sand, we will be able to know what is allowed, and what it not.

i think the answer Fris gave in this topic:
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=464549

might be the best you'll get.

To me, PG-13 is not very definite. I just don't want to force the mods to deat someone because of a misunderstanding of Obscene.

To me, PG-13 is not very definite. I just don't want to force the mods to deat someone because of a misunderstanding of Obscene.

Neither are the definitions of flaming, flamebaiting, trolling, etc. The key is to stay clear of the line and there is no chance of accidentally slipping across it. If you attempt to skirt the line, you're bound to find trouble. (Universal you here, not personal you)

The Yi Ta and Jocabia are correct; the "line" can at times be a grey area, and it's this grey area which at times causes problems. Keep clear of it and you should be fine.

~ Tsar the Mod.

Where are all these kids everyone is talking about?

There are a few 13 year olds here, true, but do you honestly think they don't know about birds and bees?

Censorship out of prudeness is not on, I think, particularly because nothing in that thread was explicit, or in any way threatening to anyone's sexual development. I see more skin just watching the ads on during The Simpsons.

I don't think any of those three deserved their punishment at all, and I would hope we could properly define the rules for future reference.

We have properly defined the rules. The fact that you disagree with them or our level of definition is irrelevant.

We have properly defined the rules. The fact that you disagree with them or our level of definition is irrelevant.
My english might me not good enough , but I don´t see anything like cybersex in this thread above...

As I was -at least partially- responsible for the re-starting of this thread I feel obliged to say that I find the punishment a bit harsh...granted, these two (Hullepupp and Cabra West) were walking a thin line, but I have been treated to much harsher words in the past with no such results...e.g. being called a nazi just for being german. I don´t want to bring that up again, just for comparability. Also I think both have learned to restrain themselves. So, in comparison with other flaming punishments maybe the ban could be lessened...as a matter of equal justice.

Just to enlargen the discussion from another point of view (and to stroke my ego by quoting myself) I know about the one-stop-rules-shop and some proper definitions, but the poster who asked why there wasn´t a warning is in my opinion not that wrong. My given example resulted in nothing, but being called a nazi, using fascist paraphernalia etc. is in germany an actionable crime for which you can be sentenced under federal law (I know jolt is located in the UK). Nobody asked for a release of the ban, most later posters just asked for a somewhat clearer definition...and "there is something when we see it" is not that helpful. Thank you

Edit: I have been here for several month, read a lot, wrote something, never flamed someone or got moderatorial attention. But I notice a steady decline in general in this forum and -like others- look for somewhere else sometimes, which is sad, because I came here through reading "Jennifer Government" and found some of the spirit of the novel which I liked very much in here...and any comment like "You are free to leave" won´t be helpful either...thank you again

in german i call it the "Busfahrer-syndrom"..If people get authority over others, they are quick to use their full power without consideration of what might be appropriate
...The mods here believe that "their" rules are the only one that counts, and they are right :
Surely we are free to leave, but some of us find funny relationships here and they do not wanna miss this

thank you for understanding

in german i call it the "Busfahrer-syndrom"..If people get authority over others, they are quick to use their full power without consideration of what might be appropriate...

...

this is all what you have to say ???

...


ok...i will try to explain it, because i have seen your entry in the "offensive post"... I think you have (not you as a person, but you as mods ) apply double standards...
on the one way there are many posts in this forum with sexual indirectnesses from people .... who were not banned...

on the other side there are posts (like the example Celestial Kingdom has told us) that are really against humanity...and there is no action by your side

So do not understand me wrong... I find it good, that you ban people in some circumstances, but i think you should balance better the time, how long you ban them

I hope you understand my bad english enough to see , that i do not want to attack you ;)

Nobody asked for a release of the ban, most later posters just asked for a somewhat clearer definition...and "there is something when we see it" is not that helpful. Thank you




Why is it that people like to stratch the cuts? Just understand that if you guys are even close to that gray area, your too close for comfort on THIS forum. If you want to do that sort of stuff, I am certain there are other forums you can go for THAT stuff, and you can remain here and talk about different stuff here. The explaination is clear because of the fact that if your in the gray area, some can get out (like has been argued) and some get nailed. Precisely because its a gray area and it is based upon interpretation. If you stay clear of the gray area completely then you cant get into trouble for it at all, right? ;)

/2cents

ok...i will try to explain it, because i have seen your entry in the "offensive post"... I think you have (not you as a person, but you as mods ) apply double standards...
on the one way there are many posts in this forum with sexual indirectnesses from people .... who were not banned...

on the other side there are posts (like the example Celestial Kingdom has told us) that are really against humanity...and there is no action by your side

So do not understand me wrong... I find it good, that you ban people in some circumstances, but i think you should balance better the time, how long you ban them

I hope you understand my bad english enough to see , that i do not want to attack you ;)

What are the posting histories for the two posters? You don't know? Hmmmm.... think that might make a difference, friend? Well, it does. How many times have they been warned in the past? Like RL law your history with infractions play into your punishment. You see the punishments as unfair but you lack the information to make that judgement. I'm good friend with one of the individuals banned and he recognizes that he went into the grey area and he got caught. It happens. It's an easy area to avoid and if you don't like avoiding there is this magical thing called 'other places to hang out'. The mods didn't make the rules, they simply enforce them as they are tasked to do. Even one of the people in the thread deleted a post because they knew they were treading the line.

You keep trying to spread this into other threads and make a big deal out of this, but unless you can tell me poster history then you are not in a position to determine fairness, like in law, that is the position of the judge. Cybersex is a crime on this forum and you don't make the rules. Real-life laws are not the laws of this forum. In real life, I can call you names. Name-calling isn't a crime. Flaming isn't a crime. Flame-baiting is not a crime. Does that mean the mods are wrong to enforce them here? Of course not. This is private property.

When you're old enough and you go to a bar they can make you take off your hat. They can not allow jeans. They can not allow black-soled shoes. You can scream all you like that wearing a hat isn't a crime, but in the end it's not up to you or the law to determine if they can make such a rule. Don't like it, go to a different bar.

1. I do not know how often the mods have warned them...maybe if you know this, please tell us
2. Sure one of them has recognized that he goes to far...so he deleted his post...is this a reason to ban him??
3. I have no problems with rules, i just need to get them explained
4. yes and I drink my beer where i want.. But if the beer tastes good, i also accept other guest in the pub i don´t really like

1. I do not know how often the mods have warned them...maybe if you know this, please tell us
2. Sure one of them has recognized that he goes to far...so he deleted his post...is this a reason to ban him??
3. I have no problems with rules, i just need to get them explained
4. yes and I drink my beer where i want.. But if the beer tastes good, i also accept other guest in the pub i don´t really like

1. I don't know and it's none of your business or mine. So you might as well admit that you have no basis for your argument.
2. One of them recognized they went too far which suggests he and likely others were well aware they were treading the line.
3. They've been explained. Look up the various movies that classify as PG-13 and don't tread into the area that might land you with an "R" rating and you'll be fine. You will never get an all inclusive explanation of the rules because it's virtually impossible. The mods have to make judgement calls based on a lot of evidence. They did so. You don't like it. Who cares?
4. If you go in my pub, you adhere to my rules or you leave. I won't change the rules because you don't like them. The fact that hats are allowed in other pubs won't change my rules regarding them nor will it affect my enforcement of such rules.

If I tell you that I require business casual attire in my club and you show up in jeans I WILL throw you out. If you show up in Khakis, I may or may not, at my discretion. Wanna avoid being tossed, show up in a button-up shirt or polo and dress pants and shoes. It's that simple. If you choose to show up in khakis accept that the discretion at the door might be that your khakis don't cut it but another guy wearing something similar that is slightly cleaner, neater and more professional might get in. Again, if you don't like, avoid the gray area and show up in dress pants.

Most people on this site will NEVER draw mod attention. This is because the rules are VERY easy to abide by. Me? I've chosen to ride the gray area a couple of times and once or twice I've gone afoul of the mods. That's the choice you make when you choose to press the line. The closer you tread the loosely-defined line the more likely you are to make a mistake about where it lies and cross it. Make a choice. But don't bitch because you chose to play a game with discretionary rules and lost.

I'd like to add something. Everything I saw in that thread can be seen on primetime television in the U.S. (Victorias Secret show, anyone?), which everyone else on the planet laughs at for its stringent censorship. I didn't see ANYTHING that was worse than pg-13, but hey, I'm not arguing, just adding my 2 cents.

If I tell you that I require business casual attire in my club and you show up in jeans I WILL throw you out. If you show up in Khakis, I may or may not, at my discretion. Wanna avoid being tossed, show up in a button-up shirt or polo and dress pants and shoes. It's that simple. If you choose to show up in khakis accept that the discretion at the door might be that your khakis don't cut it but another guy wearing something similar that is slightly cleaner, neater and more professional might get in. Again, if you don't like, avoid the gray area and show up in dress pants.



Kudos for that analogy! Very good one!

And just because the United States' Television has gone down the toilet gives no agrument to allow everything else to be flushed with it. Thats analogous to saying that we shouldnt stand up for democracy or freedom because it has been flushed in another country or other parts of the same system. Although I see where your coming from it just doesnt connect up.

Hopefully a trusty Mod will come along, and silence this soon.

The problem is just that despite what Fris says, the rules are not clear at all.

PG-13...wouldn't that mean no talk about drugs, "adult themes" (like Communism, perhaps?), war and all the rest of it? I know that many of these things would warrant an "M" in this country.

No one cares because we assume people can deal with it. But when it comes to "sex" (there, I said the evil word!), all of a sudden we go apeshit and ban everything?

Sorry, but I have yet to meet a kid on the internet which would actually take undue notice of people talking about what sort of underwear they like. If anyone wanted to see porn, there are easier ways for that...this is afterall the internet.

Every few months this tired old argument comes up, and it's always the same thing. It can't possibly be nearly as difficult as some make it out to be, because I myself and others have posted some suggestive material and not gotten deated for it - and do you know why?

We've been careful about what to put in, and what to leave out, and when to cut scene. No one's saying you can't talk about or rp sex, so please cut the drama on that. Nor is this site subject to any rules other than what's been laid out in the stickies and other reference posts. Subjective? Damn right it is, because there is no way the powers that be can possibly lay out a strict point by point guideline on what is and is not acceptable - something they've stated repeatedly.

The message has been that if you don't think you can handle it in a way that won't get you into trouble, or if you have a question as to just how close to the line what you want to post is, get some assistance from someone who does know, or don't post it. Honestly, there's no reason for threads with nothing but scantily-clad people to be oggled when Google will net you ample results without the waste of bandwidth, or why subjects that might be considered questionable can't be discussed with some measure of maturity. Sorry, but 'would you tap that' *pic follows* doesn't qualify.

What exactly do some of you think you're missing out on again?

I fail to see what the difficulty is. As has been stated previously, if you really want to get graphic or simply talk about sex til your eyes pop, there's other places for it. The excuse of 'yes, but I like it here and ought to be allowed to do anything I like for my own convenience' just doesn't cut it, and as far as I can see from statements made over the years, it never has.

"Pilatus Children" and "Ralane" have been deleted, as both are puppets of a forumbanned player. Using puppets to evade a forumban is, and has always been, a deleteable offence.

~ Tsar the Mod.

"Pilatus Children" and "Ralane" have been deleted, as both are puppets of a forumbanned player. Using puppets to evade a forumban is, and has always been, a deleteable offence.

Tac on another 'poor judgement decision' for that guy!

Let me say to ya'll this: Thanks for keeping the forum clean! I dont care where my kids could go, I wouldnt want them to find anything here that is inappropriate. ;)

If you don't want your kids to find anything inappropriate, I would suggest you don't let them look in General for the most part, and be very careful about what you let them read in the Archive, NationStates, and International Incidents forums. Some of the issues discussed in the UN forum or perhaps the Got Issues one may be deemed to adult in nature for your tastes, depending on what those are exactly.

Don't fool yourself - there's plenty of 'inappropriate' on here that is allowed within those gray areas, depending on tolerances etc. Monitor what they're doing, read ahead before letting them check a thread, do what you have to - the mods aren't capable of keeping it all squeaky-clean. And frankly, I don't think they should have to.

Over the top stuff, sure - but I know there's some of my own writing I think is too adult for my kids, and I wouldn't let them read it right now. Your mileage may vary - just don't go into it all naieve, or expecting that someone else here will be magically cleaning everything up for them.

Sorry, but I have yet to meet a kid on the internet which would actually take undue notice of people talking about what sort of underwear they like.

Hint: talking does not involve or require pictures. You want to discuss lingerie, fine. You want to swap pictures of women in lingerie, go to 4chan like everyone else.

And the issue here is people having cybersex, not the lingerie anyway. We don't allow cyb0ring on these boards; if you want to do that, there's email, there's instant messaging programs, and generally there's other places than here.

I´m leaving this thread, I (naiv) hoped to get something better than "if you are afraid to drive to fast, then don´t drive", I uttered no want of legal advice, thank you I was just comparing. At least I got several times "if you don´t like, go elsewhere"...if anyone would care to look into the discussion I was not involved in the actionable crime, but get mingled into the pot like Neu Leonstein only by asking questions. Thank you

So, your bar, me no customer

For God's sake, read the rest of the thread. Histrionics become no one.

For God's sake, read the rest of the thread. Histrionics become no one.

Thank you, I have read this entire thread and the thread in question, even contributing to it...and as long as you are no psychiatrist I would prefer not to be called histrionic, maybe look at the proper diagnostic procedure to claim a histrionic personality disorder (as you may have noticed I am a physician with psychiatric expertise and at least there is a clear definition)...I simply stated my disappointment on getting unsolicited advice, and, as I said am leaving this thread because I don´t see any point. Last of my post in this thread.

Thank you, I have read this entire thread and the thread in question, even contributing to it...and as long as you are no psychiatrist I would prefer not to be called histrionic, maybe look at the proper diagnostic procedure to claim a histrionic personality disorder (as you may have noticed I am a physician with psychiatric expertise)...I simply stated my disappointment on getting unsolicited advice, and, as I said am leaving this thread because I don´t see any point. Last of my post in this thread.


Hmm.
I´m leaving this thread, I (naiv) hoped to get something better than "if you are afraid to drive to fast, then don´t drive", I uttered no want of legal advice, thank you I was just comparing. At least I got several times "if you don´t like, go elsewhere"...if anyone would care to look into the discussion I was not involved in the actionable crime, but get mingled into the pot like Neu Leonstein only by asking questions. Thank you

So, your bar, me no customer
Sounds like I don't like the answer, so I'm going to complain that no one answered my questions, especially in light of these posts which you apparently missed.


http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10296866&postcount=8
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10298459&postcount=10
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10299060&postcount=11
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10307601&postcount=31

I´m leaving this thread, I (naiv) hoped to get something better than "if you are afraid to drive to fast, then don´t drive", I uttered no want of legal advice, thank you I was just comparing. At least I got several times "if you don´t like, go elsewhere"...if anyone would care to look into the discussion I was not involved in the actionable crime, but get mingled into the pot like Neu Leonstein only by asking questions. Thank you

So, your bar, me no customer

How is "if you don't want to drive too fast, then don't drive" the same as "this site is PG-13 and while that's a tad vague, so long as you don't do something that could possibly be construed as R you'll never have a problem"? Since you want to compare it do driving, have you ever heard of driving too fast for conditions? What speed is driving too fast for condition? You don't know do you? So how do you avoid it? When the conditions are bad you simply avoid driving at a speed that would likely make the average driver dangerous? Yeah, it's a crap shoot, but if you don't press the envelope and err a bit on the side of caution, you'll never be a problem. Are you rallying the troops to change the law on driving too fast for conditions or is only on the internet that discretionary enforcement is 'unfair'?

How is "if you don't want to drive too fast, then don't drive" the same as "this site is PG-13 and while that's a tad vague, so long as you don't do something that could possibly be construed as R you'll never have a problem"? Since you want to compare it do driving, have you ever heard of driving too fast for conditions? What speed is driving too fast for condition? You don't know do you? So how do you avoid it? When the conditions are bad you simply avoid driving at a speed that would likely make the average driver dangerous? Yeah, it's a crap shoot, but if you don't press the envelope and err a bit on the side of caution, you'll never be a problem. Are you rallying the troops to change the law on driving too fast for conditions or is only on the internet that discretionary enforcement is 'unfair'?

Against my opinion one last word...I don´t think this is the correct time or place for such an interesting discussion...why don´t go to General about it? Fear of publicity? And quote for GODS sake unquote you may enforce your rules in your bar as long as you like, but you may end up drinking your own beer, talking to the mirror (but at least a clean mirror)...so, the miscreants will be back in a few days, as far as I´m concerned they did not kill themselves over it and maybe even learned something...though it is difficult to tell what.

Against my opinion one last word...I don´t think this is the correct time or place for such an interesting discussion...why don´t go to General about it? Fear of publicity? And quote for GODS sake unquote you may enforce your rules in your bar as long as you like, but you may end up drinking your own beer, talking to the mirror (but at least a clean mirror)...so, the miscreants will be back in a few days, as far as I´m concerned they did not kill themselves over it and maybe even learned something...though it is difficult to tell what.

I always love that argument. They've had the same standards of conduct (more or less) since the beginning of the game. The game is wildly popular (so much so that a sequel is expected). ...but if they don't do things your way they are going to end up "talking to the mirror". You're claims don't seem to hold up since there seems to be a few more than 100,000 nations currently active on the game and thousands of people active on the forums, some for a few years already. If you're going to make predictions, try not to make one that should have played out already and did NOT.

There is no reason for discussion of the issue. They've been doing it for several years. It works. It gives mods enough latitude to deal with problem children. It makes Max happy. Smiles all around. *walks off whistling*

Stick a fork in it, folks. It's done.