Where do we line - a sincere discussion

SirTauntsALot··4 votes·4,055 views

~~Disclaimer ~~:

_This post is meant for discussion on a very interesting topic. This post is not meant to offend any of the Moderators or Specialists. This post is not meant to deprive or belittle any member of this forum or any person, thing or entity in general. If you feel disrespected or offended with this post please contact me. _

Edit: The title should have been "Where do we draw the line - a sincere discussion"

Lately we have noticed an increase amount of complaints that people are having their posts removed. Many people are confused (including myself) as to why some of their post are deemed offensive.

The explanation is simple. We have marched in the era of PC culture where everything you say need to have a disclaimer. People get offended left and right far to easily. I get that league is trying to remove negativity, but some negativity is healthy for both the game and the boards. When I say negativity, I don't mean insulting. Criticism should be allowed on the boards. People should not be afraid to criticize others.

The current state of the boards I see Mods or other entities with power removing posts they deem offensive. That is fine, as long there is a clear guideline as what is offensive and what is not. So... Where do we draw the line?

Let us evaluate the universal rules of the board:

#1

When you choose to participate in a discussion with the rest of the playerbase, ~~always try to be respectful and receptive ~~ to another player's point of view. Also, be mindful of how you present your point of view. If a player feels strongly on a subject, don't get caught up trying to have the last word. Just state your side and exit the conversation gracefully rather than give them the opportunity to pick a fight.

When is my post considered disrespectful ? How far can I go? Is calling someones opinion wrong disrespectful ? Very vague rule. Based on this anything can be deemed disrespectful and deleted.

#2

Do not post content intended to insult, belittle, disrespect, or intentionally offend other community members as individuals or as groups . Criticism is an important and useful method of feedback, but must be respectful and constructive in nature. Non-constructive forms of criticism (such as questioning another poster's intelligence or requesting the firing or removal of an individual) are violations of this rule.

Again very vague. How do I know I am not offending anyone with this post? Should I put disclaimers? Where do you draw the line?

I believe PC culture though takes everything to be "offensive" and I believe this is ruining the opportunity to have intense but healthy discussions. Where do we draw the line to what's offensive and what's not?

19 Comments

ModUlanopo11 votes

The explanation is simple. We have marched in the era of PC culture where everything you say need to have a disclaimer.

I disagree with this as a premise. I think we're in an era where people use the license of internet anonymity to treat people in a way they never would in person. They forget there's an actual human being behind the other screen and do away with basic respect.

Here's the thing, cultures and communities work because the participants decide on a set of mutually agreeable rules. Too strict and the group slides towards authoritarianism. Too loose and you end up with anarchy.

When we moderate, we do so with the belief the boards can - and should - be better than Facebook or YouTube comment sections, much less places like 4chan. If that's the sort of community that appeals to you, perhaps you should consider frequenting them more often.

When is my post considered disrespectful ? How far can I go? Is calling someones opinion wrong disrespectful ? Very vague rule. Based on this anything can be deemed disrespectful and deleted.

It isn't possible to give precise rules for this, but a great starting point is to imagine you're speaking to someone you respect and whose opinion you value. If you're posting in way that isn't consistent with that, you should be asking yourself why. I say this because I see a lot of people posting without starting from that baseline respect. When I get tart with someone, not only do I almost always regret it afterwards, but I try to reflect on how I came to the emotional state that led to the behavior. Being rude, condescending or dismissive is like a sugar high - it feels good at first, but there's a crash after.

I believe PC culture though takes everything to be "offensive" and I believe this is ruining the opportunity to have intense but healthy discussions.

I believe you can't have a healthy discussion where people are not debating with integrity, which includes treating them with respect.

SirTauntsALot1 votes

{quoted}

It isn't possible to give precise rules for this, but a great starting point is to imagine you're speaking to someone you respect and whose opinion you value. If you're posting in way that isn't consistent with that, you should be asking yourself why.

When I respect someone I call them out directly on their mistakes. I am sincere with them and do not stick to PC culture or being PC. I put his free speech above all. I personally appreciate when people do that for me . I don't like it when people try to stay PC and disrespect my intelligence in an attempt to do so.

I believe you can't have a healthy discussion where people are not debating with integrity, which includes treating them with respect.

Treating someone with respect can only be done if you feel that you are having a conversation with a sincere non-pretentious person. Having a discussion with anyone and having to sensor my words firstly violates the fundamental right of freedom and secondary insults the intelligent of both individuals having the discussion. Without freedom of speech, true and correct thought cannot exist.

rujitra4 votes

Respect would be giving them constructive criticism so they can improve. If you're "calling them out", that's indicative that you think you're above them in some way and thus have the right to "chide" them about their mistakes - which is definitely not what respect is. This has nothing to do with PC - unless you think respecting others is "PC".

And you're completely wrong. It is possible to treat people with respect no matter how they treat you or what your opinion of them is. You're not having to censor your words - you can choose to not play Riot's game and you will not have to censor your words. But if you wish to utilize Riot's game/servers, you must abide by Riot's rules - just as you do in any place.

Keep in mind that with infinite freedom like you request brings infinite responsibility - namely a responsibility to remain a productive and respectful member of society. You are instead wanting infinite freedom with zero responsibility for your actions - which is the definition of anarchy and is antithetical to society.

SirTauntsALot1 votes

{quoted}

Respect would be giving them constructive criticism so they can improve. If you're "calling them out", that's indicative that you think you're above them in some way and thus have the right to "chide" them about their mistakes - which is definitely not what respect is. This has nothing to do with PC - unless you think respecting others is "PC".

It has everything to do with PC. Western culture has become so sensitive that every word is deemed offensive. Calling an idea foolish should not be seen as offensive. It should be seen as a foolish idea. Calling an idea mental, mad, stupid should not be seen as offensive. We are living in an age where calling someone out for his BS is deemed more offensive than the BS the individual is spreading. This is why we live in a world so corrupt and so unfair. I should not have to sensor my words. True thought cannot exist without free speech.

And you're completely wrong. It is possible to treat people with respect no matter how they treat you or what your opinion of them is. You're not having to censor your words - you can choose to not play Riot's game and you will not have to censor your words. But if you wish to utilize Riot's game/servers, you must abide by Riot's rules - just as you do in any place.

I completely agree with you on most of the part. I called a person an apologist the other day (on a post that was very controversial) and had my post removed. Someone apparently found the word apologist to be offensive (if you look it up you will notice that it is not offensive). I personally, would not have been offended myself if someone called me an apologist while i was defending a controversial topic. I was later on told that it was the combination of words that made it offensive Riot Apologist. This is simply laughable. A non-offensive word becoming offensive just because I added the word "Riot" in front of it.

Keep in mind that with infinite freedom like you request brings infinite responsibility - namely a responsibility to remain a productive and respectful member of society. You are instead wanting infinite freedom with zero responsibility for your actions - which is the definition of anarchy and is antithetical to society.

I am not requesting infinite freedom. I am requesting that we define the limits.

Side note: Wanting infinite freedom with zero responsibility is not anarchy. In anarchy you have full responsibility of your actions. Nobody takes responsibility for your actions and nobody takes credit for your success.

rujitra5 votes

You’re so focused on words. Words only have meaning because of the way they’re combined into phrases. A word can be part of an offensive phrase even when it is not inherently offensive.

Furthermore, you do not get to force your opinions on others. You thinking something is foolish does not mean it is, nor does it mean others must think it is. As such, you have no inherent “right” to call it foolish. You also refuse to accept that when someone produces something and you insult their work, you are by definition applying that same insult to the person who created the work. When you say an idea is foolish, you are saying the person who had that idea is a fool. That is not a valid discussion point - that is you attempting to win an argument by calling them names. That’s the definition of insulting behavior.

None of this is new. This isn’t b “PC culture”. This is how society has been for centuries, and in fact this code of respect is what makes society work. Without respect and civility, you have anarchy and a breakdown of society. Period.

I am done trying to explain this to you as it is clear you are going to attempt to weasel your way into not having to be a member of society while still reaping all the benefits of society.

SirTauntsALot1 votes

{quoted}

You’re so focused on words. Words only have meaning because of the way they’re combined into phrases. A word can be part of an offensive phrase even when it is not inherently offensive.

You are missing the point of this discussion. Of course a combination of words can be offensive. I never implied the opposite. What I said is that one thing that you find offensive might not be offensive to person A or person B. Where do we draw the line? This is the topic of my post.

Furthermore, you do not get to force your opinions on others. You thinking something is foolish does not mean it is, nor does it mean others must think it is. As such, you have no inherent “right” to call it foolish. You also refuse to accept that when someone produces something and you insult their work, you are by definition applying that same insult to the person who created the work. When you say an idea is foolish, you are saying the person who had that idea is a fool. That is not a valid discussion point - that is you attempting to win an argument by calling them names. That’s the definition of insulting behavior.

I never implied that I have the right to force my opinion on others. Quite the opposite in fact. No, calling an idea foolish is my ultimate right (cf. human rights declaration). If you publish an idea then you should be prepared to listen to criticism on it. You should also be prepared to be called foolish if your idea is foolish. Why should I suffer listening to a foolish idea but the person who expressed the foolish idea gets a free pass? An idea might be foolish to some, genius for others. I have the right to express how I feel about it without being scared that my head will be chopped by the PC king.

None of this is new. This isn’t b “PC culture”. This is how society has been for centuries, and in fact this code of respect is what makes society work. Without respect and civility, you have anarchy and a breakdown of society. Period.

This is in fact VERY new. Not even a decade older! Laws that sensor/ ban words, making not using the desired pronouns an offense, you can be literally finned or even jailed for not calling a person "ze" or "hir". These are all laws that arrived in the post-PC era and more are to come. The same set are rules are being imposed on the only free space left: The internet. Having to sensor your words can lead to a very dangerous game and times.

I am done trying to explain this to you as it is clear you are going to attempt to weasel your way into not having to be a member of society while still reaping all the benefits of society.

Fair enough. I never forced you to have this conversation. You are free to participate at will. However, I would like to point out how someone might find your last 2 sentences offensive and have your post removed (which would be unfair but hilarious).

TrulyBland3 votes

{quoted}

you can be literally finned or even jailed for not calling a person "ze" or "hir".

Good thing I read through all of your posts before deciding how much effort I will put into a sincere reply. I would have been willing to look past the pointless exaggerations like

Western culture has become so sensitive that every word is deemed offensive.

and strawmen like

I don't thing the boards welcomes democratic free ideologies...

for the sake of a sensible discussion on how to best create rules for a forum, that have as little ambiguity as necessary to avoid loopholes.

But this right there is not just bullshit, it's propaganda. Whether you merely believe it to be true or not, there is no place on earth right now, where not calling a person "ze" or "hir" is enough to be fined, let alone put in jail.

And the fact that you try so hard to make this political makes me honestly wonder how this thread is still up.

SirTauntsALot1 votes

{quoted}

Good thing I read through all of your posts before deciding how much effort I will put into a sincere reply. I would have been willing to look past the pointless exaggerations like

I am glad you spent the time reading through my posts. Maybe you care to contribute a little more to the discussion next time.

and strawmen like

strawman? Do you mean taking a sentence out of context as you did?

for the sake of a sensible discussion on how to best create rules for a forum, that have as little ambiguity as necessary to avoid loopholes.

I am not even sure what you were trying to say in this one.

But this right there is not just bullshit, it's propaganda. Whether you merely believe it to be true or not, there is no place on earth right now, where not calling a person "ze" or "hir" is enough to be fined, let alone put in jail.

Newsflash buddy:

https://nypost.com/2016/05/19/city-issues-new-guidelines-on-transgender-pronouns/ You can also do a background check in what is happening in the UK on similar topics.

And the fact that you try so hard to make this political makes me honestly wonder how this thread is still up.

Trying to make this political? No, I am interested in discussing what is fair. The fact that you are trying to make it sound that this is political though won't keep this post up for much longer.

TrulyBland2 votes

Have you read that article?

The updated regulations are meant to address “situations in which individuals intentionally and repeatedly target transgender and gender non-conforming people with this type of harassment […] Penalties of up to $250,000 can be imposed for violations that are deemed to be the result of malicious intent.

These fines are about intentional and malicious harassment.

So saying that you can be fined for "not calling a person 'ze' or 'hir' " is like saying you can be fined for "driving a car" and omitting the "into a bunch of pedestrians on the sidewalk" part.

Trying to make this political? No, I am interested in discussing what is fair.

If you're not trying to make this political, why do you make this about PC culture? That P doesn't stand for pasta, you know. And why, and this is the more important one, would you start talking about your take on current laws?

SirTauntsALot1 votes

{quoted}

When we moderate, we do so with the belief the boards can - and should - be better than Facebook or YouTube comment sections, much less places like 4chan. If that's the sort of community that appeals to you, perhaps you should consider frequenting them more often.

I agree with this. I have no issues with you moderating the boards or applying rules or restrictions. However, rules should be clear and consistent. They should be clearly defined with clear limits. Having ambiguous rules, is worse than having no rules at all. It can cause more harm than good. Having ambiguous rules or guidelines can lead to people bending the rules to their will, abusing power and treating individuals unfair. Having a rule that says " Respect your peers" is a very bad rule. Respect means differently for each individual. Based on the premise of "Respecting" the word "respect" might have two opposite meanings for two different individuals.

Tl; dr. Moderating the boards is fine as long as you set clear unambiguous boundaries.

I believe you can't have a healthy discussion where people are not debating with integrity, which includes treating them with respect.

I agree again with this. However, respect for you might mean something different than the respect that I comprehend. A healthy discussion can be made only when true freedom exists. When I can express my words without censoring them and without thinking that my peers will get offended. Imagine a world where I have to start censoring each word because there is one individual out their that get's offended. It is the middle ages all over again. Where people use to have their heads chopped off because the king found their words offensive.

ModThe Djinn3 votes

This is an interesting post. I'm away for the day, but I will respond when I can.

SirTauntsALot1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8Q1cu76,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-12-06T15:35:09.274+0000)

This is an interesting post. I'm away for the day, but I will respond when I can.

I would be very interested in hearing your views. This is a post opened up for a healthy and decent discussion. However, the down-votes come raining specifically towards myself. I don't thing the boards welcomes democratic free ideologies...

ModThe Djinn3 votes

{quoted}The explanation is simple. We have marched in the era of PC culture where everything you say need to have a disclaimer.

Like Ulanopo, I disagree with this assertion.

The vast majority of things do not need a disclaimer, even though people get offended. If I say "I don't like cats" and that bothers someone, the issue is not with my statement, and if they get offended by that that's unfortunate but not my responsibility. Such a comment would never be removed.

Things become a bit trickier with "I don't like Yasuo mains." This implies that you have a specific grievance with a specific type of player based on personal bias towards those individuals, which is skirting the border of what is acceptable here. A better approach would be "I don't come across many Yasuo players I've liked," which avoids the blanket statement and makes it more about personal experience.

Things become outright problematic with statements like "Yasuo mains don't know how to play the game" or "Yasuo mains are self-absorbed players," which I hope I don't need to elaborate on.

Criticism should be allowed on the boards. People should not be afraid to criticize others.

Constructive criticism is allowed. It's not that much of a stretch to ask for "Yeah, Yasuo can be a tough match-up. What about him gives you trouble? Maybe we can give you some specific tips" instead of "Get good. Yasuo's easy to beat." Hell, even "Yeah, in your MMR Yasuo's a brutal match-up. Looking over your games you tend to not get a lot of farm early, which is definitely putting you further behind. If you can work on that, you can probably do better against him." That's criticism, yes -- you're effectively saying "you're fairly low MMR and you can't farm well," but you're doing so in a constructive, respectful fashion.

When is my post considered disrespectful? How far can I go? Is calling someones opinion wrong disrespectful?

How are you doing this? Are you saying "That's wrong?" Are you saying "That's wrong?" and then providing information to back up that assertion? How are you conveying this information, and in what tone? Is your post condescending or respectful? Do you appear to be respecting the individual even if you agree with their opinion? Have you insulted the other player at any point in the exchange in a way that might change how your post is read?

It is, as you point out, a vague rule, because human interaction is complex and can't easily be summarized in bullet points.

SirTauntsALot1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8Q1cu76,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-12-09T14:14:59.981+0000)

Like Ulanopo, I disagree with this assertion.

That's fair.

The vast majority of things do not need a disclaimer, even though people get offended. If I say "I don't like cats" and that bothers someone, the issue is not with my statement, and if they get offended by that that's unfortunate but not my responsibility. Such a comment would never be removed.

How does the phrase "Riot Apologist" sound. I am having trouble to comprehend why this is so offensive that it can get a whole post removed. Neither each word nor the combination of the two words is offensive.

Things become a bit trickier with "I don't like Yasuo mains." This implies that you have a specific grievance with a specific type of player based on personal bias towards those individuals, which is skirting the border of what is acceptable here. A better approach would be "I don't come across many Yasuo players I've liked," which avoids the blanket statement and makes it more about personal experience.

Fair enough.

Things become outright problematic with statements like "Yasuo mains don't know how to play the game" or "Yasuo mains are self-absorbed players," which I hope I don't need to elaborate on.

Okay. I'll need to stop you there. So for example, if I gathered statistics and I could prove that (based on statistics) players who tend to play X champ tend to be self-absorbed, that will be deemed offensive?

Constructive criticism is allowed. It's not that much of a stretch to ask for "Yeah, Yasuo can be a tough match-up. What about him gives you trouble? Maybe we can give you some specific tips" instead of "Get good. Yasuo's easy to beat." Hell, even "Yeah, in your MMR Yasuo's a brutal match-up. Looking over your games you tend to not get a lot of farm early, which is definitely putting you further behind. If you can work on that, you can probably do better against him." That's criticism, yes -- you're effectively saying "you're fairly low MMR and you can't farm well," but you're doing so in a constructive, respectful fashion.

That is not criticism, that's advice. Criticism is never pleasant, that is the whole purpose of criticism. You can see critics doing that all the time on movies, art, songs and books.

Overall, I think you have contributed well to this. However, I would appreciate if the rules would be modified in a way to provide some examples or make it even more clear. Also many times I see double standards on the boards. I don't believe that's okay.

A good rule should:

  1. Do good for the greater good without violating individual rights.
  2. Be understandable, clear and unambiguous
  3. Be made public.
  4. Be enforced.

Currently, I believe only number 3 and 4 are happening and even those can be improved I believe. I could provide examples on how to do this.

ModThe Djinn6 votes

{quoted}How does the phrase "Riot Apologist" sound.

Bad. Rather than digging into the player's argument, you are dismissing them and being condescending because they are on the opposing side of the argument from you. That is not constructive criticism, but rather unnecessary condescension that is actively harmful to reasonable discussion.

Okay. I'll need to stop you there. So for example, if I gathered statistics and I could prove that (based on statistics) players who tend to play X champ tend to be self-absorbed, that will be deemed offensive?

This is why this stuff is tricky. If you did a legitimate study of player personalities and playstyles and presented that data, you would probably be fine (depending on the presentation). If you responded to a Yasuo player with "you're statistically likely to be self-absorbed" that would likely NOT be fine, even if you linked the survey. The difference is one is a presentation of data gathered, and the other uses data gathered to make insulting assumptions about a specific player.

Criticism is never pleasant, that is the whole purpose of criticism. You can see critics doing that all the time on movies, art, songs and books.

Constructive criticism is the process of offering valid and well-reasoned opinions about the work of others, usually involving both positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than an oppositional one.

If you follow the above, you should be fine.

Overall, I think you have contributed well to this. However, I would appreciate if the rules would be modified in a way to provide some examples or make it even more clear.

We considered this, and opted to avoid it. The problem with this sort of thing is that there will always be numerous edge cases and exceptions, in both directions. We want the rules to be understood, yes, but we also want them to be approachable, and we can't devote the pages and pages of space it would take to give examples of even the most common edge-cases. It's simply not reasonable, and would still not meaningfully reduce confusion.

  1. Do good for the greater good without violating individual rights.
  2. Be understandable, clear and unambiguous
  3. Be made public.
  4. Be enforced.

Currently, I believe only number 3 and 4 are happening and even those can be improved I believe.

In my opinion #1 is actually not valid here, as posters do not actually have individual rights on the Boards. If the content you post violates rules, you do not have a right to post that content, period, end of story. If you violate the rules enough you do not have a right to continue using the boards, period, end of story.

#2 is, ultimately, impossible. We do try and I'm open to looking at places clarity can be increased, but we are not looking at providing unambiguous rules that will only be enforced to the precise letter of the rules. I've moderated boards like that before, and all it does is lead to people finding the worse ways they can to circumvent the spirit of the rules while technically following the letter. We're not going to have that here.

SirTauntsALot1 votes

Cheers. It was nice talking to ya. Thank you for your time.

CaptainAntiHeroz1 votes

yup things are getting out of hand

on another note O_O how u do red highlights?

CaptainAntiHeroz1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Imperial Pandaa,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=R8Q1cu76,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-12-06T18:12:20.892+0000)

https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/mouP6um4-boards-usage-guide-part-1-boards-markup

All the fancy things.

ooooooooooooooo thanks

More from Discuss the Boards

More by SirTauntsALot