Besides woman-centric articles, what else should be aggressively moderated?

[Berzee]

Occasionally an RPS article gets more strictly moderated than most. Generally this happens when the article features a woman/women or when it involves something that was said about her/them. The Hivemind is very diligent in shutting down many of the more inflammatory types of stupidity on that topic (sometimes to the point of turning comments off entirely, "Hey Baby" style). I also remember now that comments on articles relating in some way to sexual orientation are also treated with similar attentiveness.

Well and good; but are there any other topics you feel are in frequent need of the Chainsaw of Quality? I can't really think of any, but that's possibly because none of the potentially-controversial articles besides the gender-issues ones interest me enough to read them. Apologies if I have overlooked another area!

So to reiterate the question: the articles about women are pretty well defended, but do you notice any other gaps in the RPS Wall of Comment Respectability Enforcement that could be given some more attention, in order to vault the site to higher and more glorious levels of classiness?

(Please leave behind any arguments about whether or not moderation should even be an option. That is an interesting discussion about which I have many complicated thoughts myself, but this thread begins with the assumption that moderation will happen, and the aim of pointing out any areas that might have been overlooked -- so that the owners of this private website can read our thoughts, hum thoughtfully / scornfully as the case may be, and go back to doing very well at making decisions as they think best =P.)

[Heliocentric]

Post about what should be moderated should probably just get deleted. It stirs up dissent.

More seriously? the obvious don't talk about in the pub list

Religion(including cultural faccets that are not strictly religious), Politics(including wars), Euthanasia, Abortion/Stem cell/Selective Embryo.

I know i missed stuff, but that's not a bad start.

[Kadayi]

'Now you've done it <publisher/developer/PR spokesperson> I'm gonna pirate that and every game you make from here on in' comments are kind of lame. However given the number of posts it's hard to justify spending the time crunching on them tbh. Plus invariably you get some blowhard going on about their free speech being suppressed etc, etc.

[Nalano]

I don't like where this topic is heading.

Setting aside the point that there doesn't at all seem to be very much of a problem on RPS forums concerning proper decorum in gender politics, I'm against censorship in all forms. Especially since they turn topics into needless, destructive taboos (like Heliocentric and stem cell research) or are just used as batons to beat people who disagree (like Kadayi and anybody who doesn't like his favorite X).

So, no. I don't want to see anything​ aggressively moderated.

[Kadayi]

I don't like where this topic is heading.

Setting aside the point that there doesn't at all seem to be very much of a problem on RPS forums concerning proper decorum in gender politics, I'm against censorship in all forms. Especially since they turn topics into needless, destructive taboos (like Heliocentric and stem cell research) or are just used as batons to beat people who disagree (like Kadayi and anybody who doesn't like his favorite X).

So, no. I don't want to see anything​ aggressively moderated.

OPs post has zero to do with the forums and everything to do with moderating comments on RPS articles, but still don't let that get in the way of you name calling on Helio or myself *rolls eyes*

[Heliocentric]

This is a video games forum.

I think that's an important sentence in this discussion.

[Nalano]

This is a video games forum.

I think that's an important sentence in this discussion.

Videogames are not immune to politics.

[Heliocentric]

Videogames are not immune to politics.

Oh, sure... But you picked out stem cells not politics.

If the politics of the game are drawn into discussion that's fair game I guess, but within moderation* because many issues will upset and inflame peoples attitudes. But arguments about religion or other ?

*SWIDT?

[Nalano]

Oh, sure... But you picked out stem cells not politics.

If the politics of the game are drawn into discussion that's fair game I guess, but within moderation* because many issues will upset and inflame peoples attitudes. But arguments about religion or other ?

*SWIDT?

There's an "other stuff" forum right there​.

[Hypernetic]

I don't think anything should be moderated or censored, with the exception of things like spam bots.

[TillEulenspiegel]

So, no. I don't want to see anything​ aggressively moderated.
I don't think anything should be moderated or censored, with the exception of things like spam bots.
This is how you end up with Reddit.

[Nalano]

This is how you end up with Reddit.

Reddit's not a forum. Reddit's an aggregator blog.

[Kaira-]

This is how you end up with Reddit.

Nah, Reddit would be a prime example why moderation by the community itself doesn't work, especially when the community exceeds a threshold.

Also, Reddit would be a prime example on horrible layout design. And horrible communities. And many other things.

[TillEulenspiegel]

That's the kind of community you get with a FREESPEACH attitude, though. Look at the comment section of...pretty much any large blog. Huffington Post, Kotaku, whatevs. It's all shit.

Moderated communities are good. The nice thing being that if you don't like the mod policies, you can find a different one. Or go to 4chan. RPS has a certain philosophy, and it works pretty well.

[Nalano]

RPS has a certain philosophy, and it works pretty well.

Philosophy?

Please, pray tell. Tell me what their philosophy is.

[Hypernetic]

Philosophy?

Please, pray tell. Tell me what their philosophy is.

I think it's "call the police if a woman somewhere might be offended one day".

[Nalano]

I think it's "call the police if a woman somewhere might be offended one day".

"I respect how my fellow RPSers think and what they have to offer, and that's why I want to restrict what they say."

[Hypernetic]

"I respect how my fellow RPSers think and what they have to offer, and that's why I want to restrict what they say."

Right because women might be offended.

[Nalano]

Right because women might be offended.

Remember when we had women on this forum?

[Hypernetic]

Remember when we had women on this forum?

They were probably offended by the lack of offensive content and left.

[Nalano]

They were probably offended by the lack of offensive content and left.

To be fair, there was a lot of DAMNIT WOMAN STOP GIVING YOUR OPINION ON WOMEN'S ISSUES I'M TRYING TO PLAY GAMES HERE

[Hypernetic]

To be fair, there was a lot of DAMNIT WOMAN STOP GIVING YOUR OPINION ON WOMEN'S ISSUES I'M TRYING TO PLAY GAMES HERE

Yeah, but it's offensive to women to NOT say those things because then you are a white knight.

[Atarra]

Yeah, but it's offensive to women to NOT say those things because then you are a white knight. Er... what? I'm not following you on that. Being a white knight is charging needlessly to the defense of a woman who neither wants nor needs your defense. Acknowledging that a woman might have something to say on issues regarding women, whether you agree with her or not, is what happens when you don't take the attitude of "DAMNIT WOMAN STOP GIVING YOUR OPINION ON WOMEN'S ISSUES I'M TRYING TO PLAY GAMES HERE". It encourages rational discussion. I don't see why any topic should be inherently BANT from existence, but I can see why individual discussions that get out of hand should be culled, for the sake of a friendly environment. However, moderation can quickly get out of hand and make it hard to talk about anything serious at all.

[Nalano]

for the sake of a friendly environment.

A friendly environment where nothing of substance can be openly discussed is not a friendly environment.

[Atarra]

A friendly environment where nothing of substance can be openly discussed is not a friendly environment. Hence, calling out particular topics as 'taboo' helps nothing.

[Cooper]

'Now you've done it <publisher/developer/PR spokesperson> I'm gonna pirate that and every game you make from here on in' comments are kind of lame. However given the number of posts it's hard to justify spending the time crunching on them tbh. Plus invariably you get some blowhard going on about their free speech being suppressed etc, etc.The "<bete noir publisher of the day> are crap I will pirate their games" comments are a fair few lightyears away from the "women and gay people do not deserve to be represented properly in games for the reasons I give below based upon hate and predjudice".

It worries me that you would place them as similar...

[Cooper]

Yeah, but it's offensive to women to NOT say those things because then you are a white knight.Wot?

/10char

[Nalano]

Hence, calling out particular topics as 'taboo' helps nothing.

I contend, and I'm sure you'd agree, that the excesses of moderation are far worse than the excesses of no moderation.


Wot?

It was a facetious and satirical comment that if you're not treating women with the toughness in which you shit-talk guys, you're clearly trying to get into their e-pants.

[Kadayi]

The "<bete noir publisher of the day> are crap I will pirate their games" comments are a fair few lightyears away from the "women and gay people do not deserve to be represented properly in games for the reasons I give below based upon hate and predjudice".

It worries me that you would place them as similar...

Please feel free to worry about my apparent lack of a soul. Whilst you're at it maybe try reading the OPs post again.

Also this site is a private site, Jim etc set the rules and if you don't like it or how they moderate it then you're welcome to leave.

[Alex Bakke]

To everyone above me apart from Berzee: You're all talking about the RPS Forums, which have next to no moderation at all due to rarely needing it - Berzee was addressing the articles, which commonly have a much higher comment-rate by a wider diversity of people, who now and then overstep the mark.