› ›

Is calling another player "whiner", "qq", "butthurt", "scrub" etc compatible with guidelines?

jarredelavelajarredelavela Posts: 9Member Beginner
General Discussion
I would like to know for i have seen some players repeatedly calling some other players as such in game chat. Is it allowed or is it not compatible with community guidelines?
usernamekane

Comments

  • jarredelavelajarredelavela Posts: 9Member Beginner
    I have been told by CAs in game that its not, and players are expected to take screenshots of such incidents and report them if they happen. Thanks, we can close this thread.
    usernamekane
  • CrzyPsycoChickCrzyPsycoChick Posts: 667Member Intermediate
    QQ is a reportable offense now Really?!...my my how the times have changed...



    usernamekane
  • purplepiratepurplepirate Posts: 994Member Intermediate
    Profanity and cyberbullying is against the TOS, but using terms like "whiner, QQ, scrub" shouldn't be as they are terms to describe a persons' actions online. If people are going to act a certain way towards people then some labels would be appropriate and not against the TOS (even if they come off as insulting). People should always conduct themselves in an appropriate manner when on a public board but you can't account for everyone's actions particularly if you are dealing with purposeful trolls that try to hijack chats and forum threads to get attention. As long as you keep it clean then a little razing shouldn't be to much of an issue.
    usernamekane
    IGN: Samantha99
  • lefox271lefox271 Posts: 495Member Intermediate
    You get a 1000 people who think it's legitimate to act uncivilly to others, and it leads 10 people to feel it's legitimate to be racist; to be misogynistic; to be homophobic. And that leads one person to feel it's legitimate to take up a gun and kill people who are different.

    There is a rising tide of intolerance in western nations. It begins with those seemingly harmless acts of rudeness, incivility, name-calling, insults and so on. You ask anyone who is not a straight, white, middle-class and male, and they will tell you.

    Tolerance begins at home. I think we need to raise the bar about what is acceptable.

    You don't have to be rude, aggressive or insulting to make a point. As an example take a look at the recent thread on ESF. @Purplepirate lead a robust and critical debate - without anyone resorting to intolerant name-calling. 
    usernamekane
  • jarredelavelajarredelavela Posts: 9Member Beginner
    I was told that it is a bannable offense, and i found out that more than one CA had had already taken screenshots of such an incident and reported it even before i asked them about it in order to decide whether i should report it or not. So i dont think any discussing will do anything about already established policy.

    In another respect, that's not an uncommon policy at all among mainstream mmos these days. In Wow forums, even in pvp related subforums, the banhammer descends in between 2 minutes to half a day for using such wordage as i personally found out years earlier. 

    However despite my own experience by getting moderated (albeit long ago) for such jargon, i totally understand why they do it today. Its toxic for a game's community in the long run and it drives away a lot of people from the game. To the extent that a small number of people being allowed such leeway can do great damage to the community, even unintentionally. 

    That's probably the reason why Wow decided to crack down such behavior at that time, wiping out reportedly 10,000~20,000 people in 1-2 days as people who got used to such talk before did not heed the new rules. But as far as i saw, the results have been much better for their community.

    Naturally so, since no one would be crazy enough to take crap from random aggressive personas online in their gaming time while looking for entertainment. 

    So i dont see any further reason to participate in this thread on my part. No point in discussing a beneficial policy which is already the standard almost everywhere. But i must add that CAs in UWO deserve praise for their commitment to the game and their responsibilities. 
    usernamekaneCulvern
  • EnDubbEnDubb Posts: 0Member Beginner
    Grow thicker skin.

    And really? 1000 people saying “uncivil” things causes murder? LOL Some people suck regardless of income, color, nationality, sex, height, weight, upbringing ect..... people are also awesome, try focusing on the flowers and not the few weeds.

    The best part of your post is preaching “tolerance” yet you maganalize a certain group of people, from certain areas, the exact thing you’re railing against. Hypricrital nonsense,



  • PengaFlatdogPengaFlatdog Posts: 0Member Beginner
    Hey, I think i'm going to play some online computer games today...  have to make sure my therapy dog is by my chair.
  • usernamekaneusernamekane Posts: 1Member Beginner
    lefox271, you seem to start with a slippery slope fallacy, then in the next paragraph, you single out a group of people based on race, sexual orientation, class and sex. I will defend your right to discriminate, but I disagree with your take on the matter. I am generally anti-censorship, because it can lead to a more open and honest conversation. On the other hand I can certainly see UWO wanting to make the game as friendly as possible to maximize the player base. Which I like!
  • lefox271lefox271 Posts: 495Member Intermediate
    Hi @usernamekane

    Well. Ha ha. It would certainly be fallacious to claim all 'slippery-slope' arguments were 'fallacies'! There is more to the idea of a 'slippery-slope-fallacy' than an argument which takes place on a low-friction gradient.

    If you reread my post you will see the emphasis is on the mechanism which connects the events. I am saying the low-level behaviour creates conditions in which more extreme behaviours can flourish. This is a contingent connection not a causal one. (So @EnDubb no, I have not said incivility causes murder). But I am saying I believe low-level abuse provides the oxygen for 'hate' to flourish. 

    When we accept low-level abuse as the norm, it encourages some people to feel legitimate in expressing more serious forms of intolerance. And as the standard of what is acceptable falls, so the level of intolerance increases.

    It is the idea that people feel their behaviour has been legitimised which I drew attention to. Behaviour legitimised by social norms which others have also appeared to accept.

    That's why I said 'tolerance begins at home'. Because we are all responsible, in small ways, for the establishment of those norms. 

    Now you may disagree with this argument - it is after all difficult to provide evidence for it - but you cannot just dismiss it as logical fallacy.

    NB @usernamekane I am with you in relation to censorship. I believe in free speech, but at the same time I am aware how this often doesn't square with platforming hateful opinions. In any case, if we are going to allow people to speak their minds, then we must not let up on our determination to challenge their intolerance.


  • lefox271lefox271 Posts: 495Member Intermediate
    Hi @EnDubb

    I do not understand why you are saying I am hypocritical and 'talking nonsense' in reminding us that certain groups are among the most discriminated-against people in Western society?

    Would you explain what you mean? Perhaps I have misunderstood you.

    If anything my hypocrisy is in my intolerance for intolerance - LOL. But even that apparent self-contradiction is a position I would argue.

    And consider this. 

    Yes, for sure some people are less good than others at some things. Now I know that you don't give 'sucks' any darker meaning than that. You are clearly one of the good people. 

    But ask yourself, just what does it mean when I say "you suck". 

    Well it quickly becomes a term of abuse of course. Some will use it to mean the player is ignorant or stupid; that there is no good reason for them not being good at it. And then of course others use it to classify 'them' and 'us' - where the people who 'suck' are lesser people than 'us' who don't. And since they are 'lesser' than us it doesn't really matter how we treat them. And so on.

    So in one sense it doesn't matter. You are being straightforward and honest when you say "you suck". 

    But what you should not do is assume the word is 'innocent' and does no harm. The more that people say it, the more nourishment it gives to people who want to express anger and hate.

    I'll give you a good rule-of-thumb. Teachers in the UK are encouraged not to label children, but to label their behaviour. So don't tell me I suck at maritime (which I probably do), tell me what I'm doing wrong.
  • carlalexcarlalex Posts: 187Member Trainee
    @lefox271 I guess the issue is that you are so cought up inside your own little social construct, that you are incapable of sensing what goes on below your position on top of your woke invory tower.

    If you ban vulgar language you take away the voice of vulgar people - vulgar meaning common.

    Eg. a ban on foul language will disproportianlly ban African Americans because Vernecular African American English much more frequently than standard English uses terms that are considered offensive in standard English.

    It also differs a lot what people find offensive - in essence EVERYTHING is offensive to someone.

    I am not advocating for forcing communities to accept everything, but when you start complaing about "you suck", "whiner" etc. you IMHO totally lost the plot.

    Your argument that such language furthers violence I reject at the level discusses here (its not like that is dehumanizing people) - You know what really promotes violence ? The first thing I would do to provoke someone to violent action would be to take away their voice.

    Sometimes people will say mean things to you - its their human right to do so.

    I wouldnt call you are hypocrite - id call you a bully.
  • lefox271lefox271 Posts: 495Member Intermediate
    @carlalex I accept your rebuke with good grace.
  • Loki97Loki97 Posts: 0Member
    The biggest problem I've seen with disciplinary action in this game is inconsistency in standards and punishment for the same offense. The OP claims a CA has told them they consider such behavior a bannable offense yet I can assure him others pretty much ignore it at that level. Similarly some players routinely get away with actions like sexual harassment and appear to suffer no consequences while if one of their targets retaliates they risk getting banned. If your administration of discipline is perceived as haphazard or fickle eventually no one is really going to respect it.
  • miyamotomiyamoto Posts: 47Member Beginner
    Why did u bother at all? Just ignore. AND Block when nesscery. 
    purplepirate
  • CrzyPsycoChickCrzyPsycoChick Posts: 667Member Intermediate
    I don't like it because now who is to say what counts as harassing now.  Like if someone offers you 1 mil for a SSIP and you say you're outta ya damn mind is that now reportable too? 

    Part of the fun of UWO is the fact its a "mature" game like made for adults it has freaking hookers in the game for crying out loud.  We could talk like adults minus cursing or racism and it was part of the appeal. No other game is like that thats what makes it unique.

    I can tell you from experience you DO NOT want the GM involved in player business it should always be used a last resort or if the offense is really egregious as it can soon turn into a GM Coolwind tyranny situation again and destroy the game again block them or man up geez.


    If a player typing the letters "QQ" makes your eyes swell up with tears, want to turn on depressing music and curl up into a fetal position on the floor and scream in agony then online gaming really isnt for you. 

    I dont know where this recent rash of Uncharted Sensitivity Online came from but I hope it ends soon and people just play the f'in game again for christ sakes. 


  • VeclordVeclord Posts: 99Member Beginner
    I'm of the opinion that people who align themselves with a radical social justice movement make themselves into "agents" who spend 90% of their day going in to as many forms of online media as they can access, trying to rally communities they have infiltrated into and, if possible, forcibly convert them all into as my father used to like to say "rag faced basement dwellers" who use the internet as a vehicle to spread their unwanted political belief in places it normally wouldn't belong.

    If someone called you a "whiner", sorry to say but they might be right and you should muster up some backbone and either say something back, find where they are and kick their asses or simply ignore it and move on. Nobody gives a hot pile if you're offended about something, not even the GMs although they can't maintain any type of moral high ground by saying so, so they don't.

    Feelings aren't facts, and no matter your color or gender Mother Nature always gets the last word and that law says only the strong survive.

    Have you read CPCs story of land duels? She was bullied and lost terribly, she worked at it until she got better than all of them then came back and made fools out of them all. If you are knocked down you get up and find out why it happened and learn from it until you get better than they are. Not cry on forums.
  • Loki97Loki97 Posts: 0Member
    While I agree with much of Veclord's sentiments about in game comments I would take exception with the statement "only the strong survive". I wouldn't bet on any billionaire I've ever seen to last five minutes in a fight to the death with your average street tough. This is simply a myth the affluent tell themselves in a failed attempt to pretend natural selection supports the system they thrive in.
Sign In or Register to comment.