Proposal for new tag for "Offensive" mods(instead of removing them)

[tempwayne]

Everyone is offended by something. I am offended that you are offended by whatever it was that offended you but didn't offend me. :whistling:

 

Not everyone is offended by the same things. And being offended is a personal emotion. Some people have thicker skins, some cannot stand it that some things even exist in an imaginary world where they don't have to even use whatever it was that offended them. Some other examples that you probably never thought about as offensive that some people seem to be highly offended by is the existence of My Little Pony mods in Fallout or Skyrim. Believe me there are people who are just as adamant that these ( and some others that most would consider inoffensive) should not be allowed to exist and are offended by their very existence. :rolleyes:

 

Now where do you draw the line? :facepalm:

Oh come on man, you're arguing against moderators removing offensive mods. Please, lets keep that for a separate discussion. The "where do you draw the line?" question is something that applies to taking down mods as well. That's not the subject of this discussion.

GIVEN(like a conditional distribution in your high school probability) that moderators WILL find some mods so offensive that they have to be taken down, and GIVEN that some mods are not THAT offensive, here's my solution.

We're assuming that you guys(moderators) know when a mod is very offensive(in which case you currently delete them). But, when you guys feel that a mod will be offensive to "some" people, but many others will be okay with it, perhaps a tag that it is POTENTIALLY offensive might ease your decision of whether you want to retain that mod on the site. You'll be forced to delete a lesser number of mods.

Edited November 28, 2015 by tempwayne

[bben46]

As a moderator I have removed my share of offensive mods. :yes: What you are demanding is we do something about just those mods you personally feel are offensive to you. Not everyone feels the same things are offensive.

[tempwayne]

No, No, No. I'm personally not offended by any mod. In an ideal case, I would want all mods to stay on the site.

However, there are mods which a large group of people might feel offended about, while another large group thinks that they're pretty cool in a video game(i.e. there's not a clear consensus about whether they're offensive). I'm asking you to tag them separately instead of taking them down. Concrete example, a mod that brings in slavery(without any racist connotations). I don't care about such mods being on the site, cuz it's a video game anyway. Many others WILL feel offended, and I understand their view. What will you do in this case?

Edited November 28, 2015 by tempwayne

[sherameyn]

^ What bben46 said.

 

Aside from all the really ugly stuff, a lot of people are offended and would rather not like to see stuff.

 

It's okay, that's why they can ban authors themselves.

 

That, for me, is the grey section. Like My Little Pony. Personally, I hate them. I hate how they infiltrate -everything-. And I can either tolerate seeing it, or I simply ignore it.

But then there is Hello Kitty. And I loooove Hello Kitty. I just want to see Hello Kitty aaaaall over the wasteland!

 

But why would I think that Hello Kitty is offensive to some? Why can't others see that My Little Pony is offensive?

 

If I am "just browsing" and I am not seeing Hello Kitty because it is in the offensive section, and when I switch to the offensive section and see really gory stuff, like ... hm, babies hanging from the hooks in FO4 instead of some unrecognizable adults, I will be scared for life.

[zaty1]

I don't think I'm fully explaining what I mean and you might be taking my words literal and not the implied ideas behind them. This is my last approach.

 

I make an exploding horse mod(MLP). It is gory - people find it offensive - Everyone loves MLP. It gets moved to offensive catagory because they huff and puff.

You make exploding cat mod(HelloKitty). It is gory - people don't care. Everyone hates cats. Why? Opinion. (and an oddly weird set of beliefs in this example)

 

I know my examples are silly - and all the stuff that is undefined will pop up, and quite possibly be silly. So how do you apply undefined rules?

 

The tags are pretty factual, and offensive is hard to define - cut and dry. But, why does it need to be tagged anything. It has been a long time since I created my account.

I could have easily accepted in the agreement that I may see potentially offensive content. Then what? What about clumping it with adult content/consent?

 

If everyone truly did follow the rules in the ToS pertaining to file and imagedatabase comments - we wouldn't even know that anything offended anyone. But, hey - way different topic. Or, is it?

[tempwayne]

@zaty1 : So, will the exploding horse and the exploding cat mods(or another pair of mods in your example) stay on the site or not? Do you mean that they both need to be taken down to avoid offending people, or do you mean that they both need to stay on the site? While I want them both to stay, the moderators might not be okay with that because more people will get offended. My solution is, keep them both in a separate section. Isn't it better than taking both down?(I'm saying for the umpteenth time that I don't want either to be taken down, but this is a compromise).

People who think that they might be offended have to lose out on mods that offend others but not them, because they get offended by some mods.

@zaty1, @sherameyn: The cost of viewing a mod that might be offensive to some people is that you HAVE to look at other offensive mods. A mod such as babies on hooks will be deemed too offensive for anyone, and the moderators will take it down anyway(which is what happens now, so it's not a problem with the method that I suggest).

Edited November 28, 2015 by tempwayne

[zaty1]

In theory, under your proposition - they both stay on the site. As I've asked before - how do you define the rules.

 

Horse moved to offensive. Cat is not. Why not both? How do you explain that to the 2 authors. How do you explain to me the rules that moved my horse mod to an offensive click wall, and the exploding cats mod was not. Bear in mind, again hypothetically, but if someone were to be intent on endorsements and praise for a mod, how do you explain the rules that define why they are "targeted".

 

I'm ASKING HOW, if there is no "considerable debate" about the cat mod - does it get moved to offensive?

A fair standard is not being applied if you base it on "considerable debate" in this example. The squeaky wheel is getting the grease.

 

Making an offensive catagory just means essentially every mod up'd to this site must yet pass through another filter. One that, til it is distinctly defined, is ruled by opinion.

 

Note: Please, bear in mind - I don't like stuff being outright removed either. My wife is heavy into history, and actually does alot of photographic catalog'n for historical battles/artifacts/etc.

Some stuff I know will be removed, but has historical relevence to me, I admit I download instantly for personal use, editing, etc. But under the same reasons, it is why I don't bother

uploading all the other content I've made using the photos I have access to. Sad I know, but I'd rather not deal with the pitchforks.

Edited November 28, 2015 by zaty1

[bben46]

Now you want the staff to decide what should be or should not be considered offensive? That is commonly called censorship. Are we supposed to download and look at each and every mod from over 200 games, sometimes well over 100 mods a day and make an imperial decision whether or not they MIGHT be offensive to some percentage of the membership before allowing them to be posted? Or how is this supposed to work?

 

If a mod MIGHT (by my guess) offend 2% is that enough to flag it? or do we need a larger number say 40%? How do you handle people who are offended by non lore mods? or silly stuff like MLP mods? Are we supposed to arbitrarily say those are not offensive because I am not offended? - Yup a slippery slope argument. :tongue:

 

What do you consider a large group? 10? 10,000? ( do the math, 10,000 is actually less than 1% of our total membership)

How do you arrive at the total number who are offended by a particular mod? Or even a particular type of mod?

[tempwayne]

Now you want the staff to decide what should be or should not be considered offensive? That is commonly called censorship. Are we supposed to download and look at each and every mod from over 200 games, sometimes well over 100 mods a day and make an imperial decision whether or not they MIGHT be offensive to some percentage of the membership before allowing them to be posted? Or how is this supposed to work?

 

If a mod MIGHT (by my guess) offend 2% is that enough to flag it? or do we need a larger number say 40%? How do you handle people who are offended by non lore mods? or silly stuff like MLP mods? Are we supposed to arbitrarily say those are not offensive because I am not offended? - Yup a slippery slope argument. :tongue:

 

What do you consider a large group? 10? 10,000? ( do the math, 10,000 is actually less than 1% of our total membership)

How do you arrive at the total number who are offended by a particular mod? Or even a particular type of mod?

Oh, so you don't already decide what is offensive and what is not? Who takes down offensive mods now? And what criteria do you currently use to take down mods?

I'm asking that you use something similar to classify relatively less offensive mods as "potentially offensive", and take down the extremely offensive ones.

[tempwayne]

In theory, under your proposition - they both stay on the site. As I've asked before - how do you define the rules.

 

Horse moved to offensive. Cat is not. Why not both? How do you explain that to the 2 authors. How do you explain to me the rules that moved my horse mod to an offensive click wall, and the exploding cats mod was not. Bear in mind, again hypothetically, but if someone were to be intent on endorsements and praise for a mod, how do you explain the rules that define why they are "targeted".

 

I'm ASKING HOW, if there is no "considerable debate" about the cat mod - does it get moved to offensive?

A fair standard is not being applied if you base it on "considerable debate" in this example. The squeaky wheel is getting the grease.

 

Making an offensive catagory just means essentially every mod up'd to this site must yet pass through another filter. One that, til it is distinctly defined, is ruled by opinion.

 

Note: Please, bear in mind - I don't like stuff being outright removed either. My wife is heavy into history, and actually does a lot of photographic catalog'n for historical battles/artifacts/etc.

Some stuff I know will be removed, but has historical relevence to me, I admit I download instantly for personal use, editing, etc. But under the same reasons, it is why I don't bother

uploading all the other content I've made using the photos I have access to. Sad I know, but I'd rather not deal with the pitchforks.

The same way they will/won't stay on the site under the current system. Presently(without my suggestion being implemented), say the two mods you say are uploaded. One gets taken down, and the other doesn't. You do know that mods are taken down even now, right? How do you explain that to the authors now?

Doesn't every mod already pass through a filter now? If people report a mod now, doesn't it get taken down? And this takedown process is still subject to what the moderators think of the mod, and is again guided by their opinion.

Okay, "considerable debate" might be too subjective. What I really mean is, the moderators determine that the mod might be offensive to some, and not offensive to others.

Edited November 28, 2015 by tempwayne