You are currently looking at Flamebate, our community forums. Players can discuss the game here, strategize, and role play as their characters.
You need to be logged in to post and to see the uncensored versions of these forums.
- « previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- « next
![]() |
|||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Evil Trout Posted:
thank you. |
||||||
Posted On: 02/03/2009 8:18PM | View AntiRules187's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Evil Trout Posted:
So it’s because he has balls? Isn’t this just discriminating against males nudes in general? I’d be fine with only female nudes allowed, but if that’s not the direction we’re going that’s an odd argument to make.
Fook mi Posted:
Considering that meatspin IS gay porn, that’s really funny. Log in to see images! |
||||||
Posted On: 02/03/2009 8:20PM | View OrsonScottCard's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Acid Flux Posted: Don’t agree with this
Acid Flux Posted: Fully support this. Fook mi edited this message on 02/03/2009 8:23PM |
||||||
Posted On: 02/03/2009 8:23PM | View Fook mi's Profile | # | ||||||
|
I know ET (edit) HAS provided a response to this, so I’ll try not to offer a definition of shock images, because to an extent it is subjective. After all, I recently tried to define “NSFW” based on a similar thread.
However, I will mention that, while Forumwarz certainly contains some material that can be construed as offensive (hence the initial disclaimer), most of that is strictly related to the text and subtext of the content. At no point in the Forumwarz storyline do you see any shock images. Pictures can generally create a much more visceral reaction in the viewer, and they’re far less work-safe.
I would say a “shock” image is anything that’s deliberately posted in order to provoke the user into reactions of stress, disgust, fear, anger or other involuntarily negative emotions. Of course, since a lot of people have already seen Goatse, you could argue that they’re no longer “shocked.” But it is reasonable to say that a Goatse noob (a very coveted demographic on the web!) could still be shocked by it.
I want to take an aside to address a different but related topic which we’ll probably need to banhammer out at our next meeting: The OP reported me for “trolling” in my Black History Month thread in Ayn Rands, and apparently people are complaining that by not banning me, we’re being lenient towards admins and therefore hypocritical.
All I can say is, first off, there must be some obvious differences between what me and other mods consider “trolling.” According to Wikipedia: a Troll is “a person who is deliberately inflammatory on the Internet in order to provoke a vehement response from other users.” I don’t believe I was trolling, or more accurately, role-playing as a Troll (since it’s a “non-RP forum,” that appears to be the issue). I was not role-playing by posting a dumb comment, or a funny video, or referring to a longstanding joke about my IRL friend and Forumwarz co-creator. I believe I was engaging in very typical behavior for my personality, much like other people would do in every other forum in the world. I was also not being crbum or mean to my fellow posters, and I think that’s a crucial point.
[I did, however, believe the picture of a hanging was crossing the line. That kind of thing was reprimanded, and I can see why. That, in my opinion, is deliberately offensive. However, I understand that there are gray areas, and you have to appreciate that as well. Also, mods are going to make calls that differ from others, which is unavoidable.]
You may have noticed that I’m not usually the one banning people. I’m not saying this because I’m “the nice guy,” like an easygoing uncle who lets you stay up late and drink Pepsi. I’m saying it because I want to be able to post typical, silly, Internet-normative bull**** without constantly worrying about being banned, and I want the same for you guys. I’m not saying the IRL forums should all degenerate into troll-fests. But the tattlers who report every single post that veers from the path of complete seriousness, in my opinion, are completely misguided. I can see no good reason for that kind of thing, other than for revenge, to point out apparent hypocrisy or more likely, to simply ruin other people’s fun. Just because you can report people, doesn’t mean you have to pretend to be offended by every single thing you read. As a mod, I can’t help but roll my eyes at 90 percent of reported posts, because they seem so innocuous.
What I’m getting at is, while we’re going to have to clear up some rules about the “in-betweener” forums (and other things that come up, as in the OP), let’s at least keep this in mind: Our community is not offended easily, but it can be offended. That means you should neither a) act as though you’re offended by things that don’t offend you nor b) go out of your way to test people’s limits of offense.
If we can do that, we’ll have a far fewer reports and far fewer bans. To me, that feels like a win-win situation. Jalapeno Bootyhole edited this message on 02/03/2009 8:39PM |
||||||
Posted On: 02/03/2009 8:34PM | View Jalapeno Bootyho...'s Profile | # | ||||||
|
Adapt Posted:
Based on this, and skipping a page of discussion, I pretty much find everything pretty suitable. It’s only irrelevant images that somewhat bother me when it’s a serious discussion or a simi-serious discussion. |
||||||
Posted On: 02/03/2009 8:37PM | View DG-Root's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Raepdog Posted:
Explain why.
Edit: Actually, don’t. This isn’t the thread or forum for it. Acid Flux edited this message on 02/03/2009 8:43PM |
||||||
Posted On: 02/03/2009 8:40PM | View Acid Flux's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Evil Trout Posted:
Well I dont think his testicles are wrong, they are perfectly normal, the only “shocking” thing on that picture is the streched bum. But once again, this is my personal opinion. edit: and about asking the mods, I asked tubsweetie and banhammer about a picture and they tought it was not ban worthy, they banhammer also added “but ET might find it ofensive” aka, even tough I have the aproval of a moderator I can still get banned. ANGRY HOBO edited this message on 02/04/2009 5:27AM |
||||||
Posted On: 02/04/2009 5:21AM | View ANGRY HOBO's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Angry hobo Posted:
That picture was one of the “questionable” ones I referred to earlier. There have been others which people have shown me which I’ve been able to make definitive calls on. |
||||||
Posted On: 02/04/2009 8:42AM | View MC Banhammer's Profile | # | ||||||
|
I am a pretty jaded individual. I am not offended but anything I see here. I do recognize however that some images are pretty obscene though. Goatse, Tubgirl, and the old alt.tasteless pics are not so much offensive as they are indecent. Shock is subjective, but I think we can all agree to some reasonable degree that not everyone is as jaded as those of us who have been around since the BBS days. Some images, are shown with the intent of shock value. Sadaam Goatse might not have offended Nicco, I found it hilarious myself, but imagine a 16 year old kid who has never seen it stumbling on that page before you say that it isn’t shock. I know that there are plenty of kids who have seen Goatse but it doesnt change the fact that there are those who havent. I am p. sure that most mods are not offended by shock so much as they are enforcing rules. I also agree that the rules defining shock should be more in depth, with examples. There should be a set of CZ approved guidelines for what is considered appropriate delivery of shock and what is considered just plain wrong. This is a complex issue that is not going to be resolved quickly. |
||||||
Posted On: 02/04/2009 8:51AM | View Xylon's Profile | # | ||||||
Is this offensive?
Log in to see images! |
|||||||
Posted On: 02/04/2009 9:02AM | View Laguna's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Xylon Posted:
The problem with this approach is it just invites people to try to push boundaries. Better to not even go near the boundaries, IMO. |
||||||
Posted On: 02/04/2009 9:02AM | View MC Banhammer's Profile | # | ||||||
|
MC Banhammer Posted:
Unfortunate fact of this particular game and community: it’s all about pushing boundaries as far as you can.
Edit: although I should personally say that I love that about this place. Fortunato edited this message on 02/04/2009 9:19AM |
||||||
Posted On: 02/04/2009 9:19AM | View Fortunato's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Fortunato Posted:
Completely agreed. |
||||||
Posted On: 02/04/2009 1:16PM | View OrsonScottCard's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Im pretty sure this would have been brought up by now (Id be surprised if it wasn’t) But im lazy and dont want to go through this thread.
This weeks Forumbuildr logo-elect is a shock image (Goatse), without a doubt, and its still around and looks to have a commanding lead going into tomorrows finalization. Whats the deal with that. How will this be handled, if at all. |
||||||
Posted On: 02/05/2009 2:16AM | View dobnits's Profile | # | ||||||
|
I’m fairly certain that FW is going to attract people across the internet who relish the blatantly offensive: 4chan, SA neckbeard goons, random trolls, GNAA, and etc. would enjoy this site. Hell, I’m a former member (though I didn’t participate much, primarily in #bum on their IRC when it was there before some internal bull**** drama moved it, though I’m mentioned in a few press releases) of the GNAA and am utterly unphased by anything.
I don’t know if it has been discussed before, as I’m pretty new here, but couldn’t there be an alternative flamebate forum where shock images like Goatse are allowed, and basically moderate only illegal pictures and unfunny crapflooding? |
||||||
Posted On: 03/01/2009 5:22PM | View BEAT_WOMEN's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Here’s my definition of shock. 1:Is it violent? If yes, go to 2. If no, go to 4. 2:Are humans or animals visibly mutilated grotesquely? If yes, it’s shock. If no, go to 3. 3:Is it racist? If yes, it’s shock. If no, it’s not shock. 4:Is it sexual (does it involve genitals or the bum or breasts and/or nipples)? If yes, go to 5. If no, it’s not shock. 5Log in to see images!oes it involve anyone underage? If yes, it’s shock and furthermore illegal. If no, go to 6. 6:Could a heterosexual male with no unusual fetishes masturbate to it? If yes, it’s porn. If no, it’s shock. |
||||||
Posted On: 03/01/2009 9:17PM | View Big Brother's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Big Brother Posted:
so you say gay porn is shock |
||||||
Posted On: 03/02/2009 5:14AM | View ANGRY HOBO's Profile | # | ||||||
|
Yes, primarily because I’m annoyed at that guy who posts those young males ****ing each other constantly. |
||||||
Posted On: 03/02/2009 7:49PM | View Big Brother's Profile | # | ||||||
|
I would say that nothing really offends or shocks me too much anymore. There was a site I used to love before they started asking for credit card information and that was the SickSiteNetwork. They actually had things like security cam footage of real people getting murdered or in terrible accidents and that never did offend me (probably something wrong with my head -_-), but that would most likely offend plenty of other people on this site right now.
So, to get to the point, just because something might be a little offensive doesn’t mean that it is shocking and if you’re offended easily, you probably shouldn’t be here. Still, if something is graphic (like anything you would find on a Guro website or a place like Bizarre Magazine, Girls & Corpses Magazine, or that Rotten website) then it should be labeled shocking. |
||||||
Posted On: 03/02/2009 8:04PM | View Miss Information...'s Profile | # | ||||||
|
Angry hobo Posted:
Hmm, that’s a fine line. Gay porn doesn’t appeal to me, so it’s more Log in to see images!
Call it the ‘grey area’, and leave it at that. |
||||||
Posted On: 03/02/2009 8:13PM | View Acid Flux's Profile | # | ||||||
- « previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- « next