Current Events > Been a week, and we still don't know what the hornyposting/politics rules are

(+) Yeah! (+)

I would like to invite everyone to reread the initial announcement very carefully.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/6-gamefaqs-announcements/80747432

Setting aside the sheer absurdity of this policy change (which I summed up at the end of the second feedback topic https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/11-team-gamefaqs/80748677), we have yet to receive a clear consensus on what these new rules actually mean. A complete ban on politics is far too broad for anyone to understand what is and isn't allowed when discussing certain gains. And you will also note that nowhere in that announcement does it say hornyposting is banned at all. All it says is that it will be "addressed".

At the moment, there FIVE unanswered topics on Ask the Mods regarding these new rule changes. Including a very simple one by me asking where these new rules are written, since we can't find them anywhere and thus can't be reasonably expected to follow them. Despite this, certain mods have gone on a rampage deleting anything that could be remotely construed as hornyposting as if there were a defined rule.

So humbly I ask that, until these rules are clearly stated in the ToS and/or User Content Rules, the mods cease punishing users for something that hasn't been officially implemented.

Not telling us means that they can purge users faster and kill CE faster.

Hard to follow the rules when you don't know what they are

I belive it means dont post stuff that just ogling someone real or fictional.

Like some posted a video about g strings it was a new report. That is okay. Of someone like posted a picture saying look at these hot hunks in g strings that would be okay.

Next, they'll ban asking about rules

I havent read that topic, but I wonder how this no politics thing is implemented in games that have a clear political inspiration.

For example: in BG3 you can make some fairly obvious comparisons between the Druids and a faction in the city of Baldurs Gate and far-right politics.

Foppe posted...

Not telling us means that they can purge users faster and kill CE faster.

True.

Yes we know what the politics rule is, it's been clear since the first day. Banned everywhere but CE.

Hornyposting is the only unclear thing

cjsdowg posted...

I belive it means dont post stuff that just ogling someone real or fictional.

Like some posted a video about g strings it was a new report. That is okay. Of someone like posted a picture saying look at these hot hunks in g strings that would be okay.

What you believe is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that, officially, the rule doesn't currently exist.

Kaldrenthebold posted...

Yes we know what the politics rule is, it's been clear since the first day. Banned everywhere but CE.

So does that mean we're flat-out not allowed to talk about games that have political themes? I don't know how Fandom intends to keep the site afloat of they ban discussion of Call of Duty, Metal Gear Solid, etc.

pokedude900 posted...

What you believe is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that, officially, the rule doesn't currently exist.

So does that mean we're flat-out not allowed to talk about games that have political themes? I don't know how Fandom intends to keep the site afloat of they ban discussion of Call of Duty, Metal Gear Solid, etc.

It's also been answered by Uta. If the game has heavy political themes it's fine to talk about but just a general politics topic is not allowed

Kaldrenthebold posted...

Yes we know what the politics rule is, it's been clear since the first day. Banned everywhere but CE.

Hornyposting is the only unclear thing

What's not clear about the politics rule is what is political.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/e/e31dbde5.jpg

Kaldrenthebold posted...

It's also been answered by Uta. If the game has heavy political themes it's fine to talk about but just a general politics topic is not allowed

That is one mod's opinion, not an officially stated rule.

The site just wants to be able to ban users on a whim.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/11-team-gamefaqs/80748677/979943716

pokedude900 posted...

What you believe is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that, officially, the rule doesn't currently exist.

So does that mean we're flat-out not allowed to talk about games that have political themes? I don't know how Fandom intends to keep the site afloat of they ban discussion of Call of Duty, Metal Gear Solid, etc.

If you are trying not to get banned it is fucking relevant..or are you just complaining?

Foppe posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/11-team-gamefaqs/80748677/979943716

...until the conversation deviates into a topical/current events. Then [locked].

cjsdowg posted...

If you are trying not to get banned it is fucking relevant..or are you just complaining?

Dude...what are you talking about? Just because you believe the rule works that way doesn't mean that's the case. So therefor it's irrelevant.

Tanthalas posted...

I havent read that topic, but I wonder how this no politics thing is implemented in games that have a clear political inspiration.

For example: in BG3 you can make some fairly obvious comparisons between the Druids and a faction in the city of Baldurs Gate and far-right politics.

Talking about politics that are specifically based within games are okay. They actually stated that multiple times.

I wouldn't risk using games as a platform to solely discuss real world politics though.

Miquella posted...

Talking about politics that are specifically based within games are okay. They actually stated that multiple times.

I wouldn't risk using games as a platform to solely discuss real world politics though.

You can't really separate them, that's the problem. It's real world politics that gives the context for a lot of in game politics. The line is really fuzzy and differs from person to person and time to time. Just look how many people are bitching about how the new X-Men is woke when it's nearly identical in setting themes to the 90s cartoon that those same people enjoyed.

Announcement says-
Additionally, political topics outside of CE will be banned.

Doesn't this imply any political topics in CE is okay, because the preceding sentences had nothing to do with politics?

reincarnator07 posted...

You can't really separate them, that's the problem. It's real world politics that gives the context for a lot of in game politics. The line is really fuzzy and differs from person to person and time to time. Just look how many people are bitching about how the new X-Men is woke when it's nearly identical in setting themes to the 90s cartoon that those same people enjoyed.

Complaining about something being "woke" shouldn't be allowed anyway. It's a springboard for bigotry and trolling.

It's intentional that we don't know or have clear guidelines.

IdiotMachine posted...

Announcement says-
Additionally, political topics outside of CE will be banned.

Doesn't this imply any political topics in CE is okay, because the preceding sentences had nothing to do with politics?

Yes, CE is the new 261 LUE.

Miquella posted...

Complaining about something being "woke" shouldn't be allowed anyway. It's a springboard for bigotry and trolling.

Absolutely, it's basically just code for "I don't like seeing anything aside from straight white men". However, they genuinely do think that their media is now political, even when more normally adjusted people do not. The line is being drawn differently.

Formal rules about hornyposting won't mean much. If they merely wanted to stop hornyposting, CE's privatization and permaban combo would be hugely unnecessary. All they had to do was tell the mods to ban the likes of Vegy, Neon, Rial, Calwing, and the rest of the 'Would' squad for disruptive posting.

At the end of the day Fandom wants nothing but game related discussion. Timmy's post was unequivocal in this regard. Taking that into account, they most likely killed CE because CE is the largest source of non-gaming discussion here. Hornypost just gave them a convenient excuse.

I'd love to be proven wrong here, but Fandom is a known internet entity. It's the final destination where communities go to die.

Presumably, it's working. There hasn't been any hornyposting.

Vague rules and harsh penalties that make posters extra careful, rather than guidelines you can tiptoe right up to, is likely the intention.

So wait, things are being modded that arent clearly disallowed in the TOS? Could this be considered a breech of contract with the user base?

The user guidelines haven't been updated since before Fandom took ownership of GameFaqs.

I pointed out this glaring issue on "message board help", but haven't heard a response.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/2-message-board-help/80749244

Cory898 posted...

So wait, things are being modded that arent clearly disallowed in the TOS? Could this be considered a breech of contract with the user base?

Not likely, since the first line of the "User Content Moderation" is:

GameFAQs reserves the right to remove any user created content that is not in the best interests of the site or its visitors.

Come to think of, I wonder how the site will handle the sports boards when the topic of public funding for new stadiums/arenas invariably pops up. A new stadium discussion is absolutely topical there, and if those greedy bastard owners push for public money as they always do, discussing that would likewise be topical.

I see people claiming that Fandom is keeping it vague on purpose. But while they may very well be the case, they're going about it in a way that doesn't make sense. Several mods have come forward and said that they don't know what the new rules are either, expressing frustration with the lack of communication from the admins. And to that I say that they shouldn't feel obligated to enforce a rule they don't understand.

cjsdowg posted...

I belive it means dont post stuff that just ogling someone real or fictional.

Like some posted a video about g strings it was a new report. That is okay. Of someone like posted a picture saying look at these hot hunks in g strings that would be okay.

Had a mod tell me it's also OK to post official artwork or screenshots of characters like Ivy or Cammy and it be a ass shot just no sexual remarks can be made about the pics.

Sufferedphoenix posted...

Had a mod tell me it's also OK to post official artwork or screenshots of characters like Ivy or Cammy and it be a ass shot just no sexual remarks can be made about the pics.

So if other users make those remarks, not you, does the thread get shut down?

Would the user making the remarks get hit with a mod, while you do not?

Since there are no posted guidelines, the above is a mystery!

ooger posted...

So if other users make those remarks, not you, does the thread get shut down?

Would the user making the remarks get hit with a mod, while you do not?

Since there are no posted guidelines, the above is a mystery!

I would assume only the user making the remarks would get in trouble. I suppose if like every post is sexual remarks the thread might get shut down but idk.

Sufferedphoenix posted...

Also had a mod tell me you could post say ivy or Cammy and it be a ass shot and that be fine as long as there isn't lewd comments about it.

Had a mod tell me it's also OK to post official artwork or screenshots of characters like Ivy or Cammy and it be a ass shot just no sexual remarks can be made about the pics.

Remarks by the poster or remarks from other posters?

Sufferedphoenix posted...

I would assume only the user making the remarks would get in trouble. I suppose if like every post is sexual remarks the thread might get shut down but idk.

The most we can do is hypothosize about it.

The rule is that before making a post about one of these subjects, you have to take a second and remember how old you are, the minimum age for GameFAQs, and what exactly you want to achieve.

ooger posted...

The most we can do is hypothosize about it.

I got the info from a mod that hangs around the potd board. Another mod commented too basically saying the same. I didn't recognize that mod though. The one I recognized was mcbatcommander or something like that.

For all the times I asked in this board that had mods commenting in it I never got a answer. I ask in a topic on a different board that at thr time had no comments from mods and I got a response. Go figure

im afraid to post a picture of a rhinoceros tbh

Vyrulisse posted...

It's intentional that we don't know or have clear guidelines.

This for sure. No reason to clarify.

Honestly like some others have said it seems intentionally vague so they can ban people at their will. These are puritan levels that would make a Mormon blush.

Hey @DToast how's your very important big boy job going today? Do you think you can fit this one into your schedule?

Bad faith TOS

Oh it's after 3, he must have gone home.

Here's the thing. The mods have made decent efforts to clear it up in various posts. But that's all it is - scattered posts, that not everyone will see, and very few people will be saving a link to, and that's if they don't purge. It's very possible that someone not having seen these posts may post something that falls on the wrong side of the line, and get hit.

What's really needed is a follow-up topic somewhere like the announcements board, consolidating the information in one place where most people will easily find it and it can be easily linked to for those who still ask. Even better would be updating the actual rules page.

Trumble posted...

Here's the thing. The mods have made decent efforts to clear it up in various posts. But that's all it is - scattered posts, that not everyone will see, and very few people will be saving a link to, and that's if they don't purge. It's very possible that someone not having seen these posts may post something that falls on the wrong side of the line, and get hit.

What's really needed is a follow-up topic somewhere like the announcements board, consolidating the information in one place where most people will easily find it and it can be easily linked to for those who still ask. Even better would be updating the actual rules page.

You speak logic.
That is not the Fandom way.

Maybe tomorrow guys. I'm sure he was tired after his time off, he needs a day to spin up.

According to a mod response from this topic I made, new user guidelines are in progress of being written.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/10-ask-the-mods/80752939#3

ooger posted...

According to a mod response from this topic I made, new user guidelines are in progress of being written.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/10-ask-the-mods/80752939#3

Things probably would have been smoother if they had a new TOS in place first. Absolute armature hour.

I agree 100%