LieutenantIV
Experienced
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 187
- Reaction score
- 239
First off, let me say this: I know these threads are extremely persistent, annoying, and overall repetitive. However, I do believe that now is the time for this to be addressed, especially with the recent rewriting of the hacker ban policy. I feel like a rewrite for allocating a new rule is in order.
A couple months ago, as some of you may know, I played on another popular server. This server, after having received so many community complaints, decided to instill punishments onto players whom were ‘abusive’ in chat – this is relevant, but not limited to: ‘eZ’, ‘Rekt’, ‘L2P’, and the likes. Most of the community was very happy about this rule, but I was not. I felt it was simply silly because the whole idea was childish. My opinions didn’t mold for awhile, but one interesting statistic I seemed to accumulate from this idea was that these messages did, indeed, go down, partly due to the fact it was now punishable, and partly due to the fact that there was a filter in place – two ideas I will be discussing in this thread.
However, as time has come and gone, my opinions have changed ever so slightly, but slightly enough to believe that there needs to be some kind of change regarding this policy of ‘It isn’t and shouldn’t be bannable because...’ – it should be bannable, or at least, some measures need to be taken to attempt to tone the issue down.
The first idea I will propose, and one that I assume most logical, straight-forward, and simplistic, is that messages such as ‘Ez’, ‘Rekt’, and ‘L2P’ should be made punishable – punishable by what, that’s not up to me, but here’s why. Throughout my entire awareness of this situation, I always knew, and still do, that it is cocky, unnecessary, and quite literally rude. In its simplest form, you’re telling someone they suck at a game they enjoy to play. You’re telling someone that they’re trash.
Another reason is that the rules state that these kind of things should not be tolerated. As seen in the official rules thread..
Also in the rules is this...
This rule states that exploiting loopholes in the rules is not to be tolerated. As MoLoToV said in a thread he created a few months back...
“Apparantly you are allowed to “antagonize other members or staff members in order to evoke any specific reaction to the point of including up to abusive reactions.” by trash talking them in this specific way, which is, in my eyes, a loophole in the rules. You are able to bypass the rules, but it’ll still lead into the same reaction.”
Although he was quoting another rule (one regarding antagonizing other users or staff in an attempt to stir response, which is also quite interesting), it’s still very clear to myself that saying ‘eZ’, in itself, is exploiting a loophole.
Some common arguments I’ve heard from people is that it’s ‘just a game’ and the whole thing isn’t meant to be taken seriously, all of which are fair enough arguments that I’ll kindly refute. Yes, it is just a game, but that doesn’t mean you can act in an abusive manner and say/do what you want. If this was the case, rules wouldn’t be instigated. The rules are here to police players because the administration wants to create and preserve a safe, fun playing environment, which is not possible when excessive arrogance and rude messages fill the chat. In regards to not taking the situation seriously, that’s such a common, unrealistic ideology that it’s simply impossible. You can’t tell an entire majority of people to not take something seriously, and you can’t as easily herd them around like a group of sheep. If everybody didn’t take it seriously, we wouldn’t have a problem. However, we do have people taking it seriously, and that causes a problem. The problem isn’t with taking it seriously, though. If you eliminate the underlying problem, you can eradicate at least part of the ‘competitiveness problem’.
My final idea, assuming that making it punishable is not an available idea, is at least filtering out these words. I know filters only do so much, but in the long run you may just save some players a lot of hassle. Yes, they can be bypassed easily, but that’s why making the whole situation punishable is a route myself, and many others, would like to explore.
A couple months ago, as some of you may know, I played on another popular server. This server, after having received so many community complaints, decided to instill punishments onto players whom were ‘abusive’ in chat – this is relevant, but not limited to: ‘eZ’, ‘Rekt’, ‘L2P’, and the likes. Most of the community was very happy about this rule, but I was not. I felt it was simply silly because the whole idea was childish. My opinions didn’t mold for awhile, but one interesting statistic I seemed to accumulate from this idea was that these messages did, indeed, go down, partly due to the fact it was now punishable, and partly due to the fact that there was a filter in place – two ideas I will be discussing in this thread.
However, as time has come and gone, my opinions have changed ever so slightly, but slightly enough to believe that there needs to be some kind of change regarding this policy of ‘It isn’t and shouldn’t be bannable because...’ – it should be bannable, or at least, some measures need to be taken to attempt to tone the issue down.
The first idea I will propose, and one that I assume most logical, straight-forward, and simplistic, is that messages such as ‘Ez’, ‘Rekt’, and ‘L2P’ should be made punishable – punishable by what, that’s not up to me, but here’s why. Throughout my entire awareness of this situation, I always knew, and still do, that it is cocky, unnecessary, and quite literally rude. In its simplest form, you’re telling someone they suck at a game they enjoy to play. You’re telling someone that they’re trash.
Another reason is that the rules state that these kind of things should not be tolerated. As seen in the official rules thread..
Take a quick peek at the first example regarding disrespecting other players. It reads, “[User], you suck at Minecraft.” And, in case you are unaware, ‘L2P’ means ‘learn to play’. In what magical, mystical language does ‘learn to play’ not mean ‘you suck’? If anyone wants to clear this up for me, I’d be grateful, because I can’t even figure out myself.
Also in the rules is this...
This rule states that exploiting loopholes in the rules is not to be tolerated. As MoLoToV said in a thread he created a few months back...
“Apparantly you are allowed to “antagonize other members or staff members in order to evoke any specific reaction to the point of including up to abusive reactions.” by trash talking them in this specific way, which is, in my eyes, a loophole in the rules. You are able to bypass the rules, but it’ll still lead into the same reaction.”
Although he was quoting another rule (one regarding antagonizing other users or staff in an attempt to stir response, which is also quite interesting), it’s still very clear to myself that saying ‘eZ’, in itself, is exploiting a loophole.
Some common arguments I’ve heard from people is that it’s ‘just a game’ and the whole thing isn’t meant to be taken seriously, all of which are fair enough arguments that I’ll kindly refute. Yes, it is just a game, but that doesn’t mean you can act in an abusive manner and say/do what you want. If this was the case, rules wouldn’t be instigated. The rules are here to police players because the administration wants to create and preserve a safe, fun playing environment, which is not possible when excessive arrogance and rude messages fill the chat. In regards to not taking the situation seriously, that’s such a common, unrealistic ideology that it’s simply impossible. You can’t tell an entire majority of people to not take something seriously, and you can’t as easily herd them around like a group of sheep. If everybody didn’t take it seriously, we wouldn’t have a problem. However, we do have people taking it seriously, and that causes a problem. The problem isn’t with taking it seriously, though. If you eliminate the underlying problem, you can eradicate at least part of the ‘competitiveness problem’.
My final idea, assuming that making it punishable is not an available idea, is at least filtering out these words. I know filters only do so much, but in the long run you may just save some players a lot of hassle. Yes, they can be bypassed easily, but that’s why making the whole situation punishable is a route myself, and many others, would like to explore.
