LogFAQs > #886082567

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Is censorship of offensive speech on gamefaqs "morally" sound?
darkknight109 09/05/17 5:58:49 PM #26:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Calling everything you disagree with offensive is pretty immoral, after all by that logic you would be modded for arguing with me. It has nothing to do with whether I agree with it or not, nor did I call it offensive. I just said you broke the rules. Which you did. Source: you got modded and suspended for two weeks. Kyuubi4269 posted... Being allowed to do something doesn't make it moral. No, but the whole premise of your comparison was kind of ridiculous to begin with, so that's about all the energy I felt like putting into a response. UraRenge2005 posted... Gamefaqs moderators DO have a tendency to moderate and delete posts of forum users that do NOT break the ToS. They do this to attempt to censor people they do not agree with in order to prevent others from hearing an objective opinion. These moderators are in a position of power and they DO use it to censor people unjustly. I myself have had about four moderations overturned when I requested a different mod read a case. I know I'm not the only one. In my experience, mods trying to mod people simply because they disagree with them are rare (though certainly far from unheard of - had it happen to me a few years back). And, as you've pointed out, there is a dispute system whose entire purpose is to counteract that. I find most of the time moderations get overturned, it's less likely that the original mod was being a dictatorial tyrant trying to stifle dissent and more likely that it was a borderline case and/or the original mod didn't read the entire thread and see the context of the post and a subsequent mod disagreed that an offence took place at all. Regardless, I'd argue that what your referencing isn't really what the OP is asking about. The question isn't about mods modding unjustly, it's asking whether banning offensive speech (i.e. something you can be modded for by a mod who is 100% following the rules) is moral. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:886082567] in Is censors... [t:75743225]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Calling everything you disagree with offensive is pretty immoral, after all by that logic you would be modded for arguing with me.</quote> It has nothing to do with whether I agree with it or not, nor did I call it offensive. I just said you broke the rules. Which you did. Source: you got modded and suspended for two weeks. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Being allowed to do something doesn't make it moral.</quote> No, but the whole premise of your comparison was kind of ridiculous to begin with, so that's about all the energy I felt like putting into a response. <cite>UraRenge2005 posted...</cite> <quote>Gamefaqs moderators DO have a tendency to moderate and delete posts of forum users that do NOT break the ToS. They do this to attempt to censor people they do not agree with in order to prevent others from hearing an objective opinion. These moderators are in a position of power and they DO use it to censor people unjustly. I myself have had about four moderations overturned when I requested a different mod read a case. I know I'm not the only one.</quote> In my experience, mods trying to mod people simply because they disagree with them are rare (though certainly far from unheard of - had it happen to me a few years back). And, as you've pointed out, there is a dispute system whose entire purpose is to counteract that. I find most of the time moderations get overturned, it's less likely that the original mod was being a dictatorial tyrant trying to stifle dissent and more likely that it was a borderline case and/or the original mod didn't read the entire thread and see the context of the post and a subsequent mod disagreed that an offence took place at all. Regardless, I'd argue that what your referencing isn't really what the OP is asking about. The question isn't about mods modding unjustly, it's asking whether banning offensive speech (i.e. something you can be modded for by a mod who is 100% following the rules) is moral. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1