StarGateWars Forums

ربهالنوع wrote:tl;dr Rules did not get stricter, people simply became worse forum members.

The rules may have not gotten stricter but some of the mods definitely did..

Giving a masking warning for asterisks is just absurd, that has always been the games filter, and there are thousands of PM's posted on these forums with them, with no warnings issued.

Seriously since WHEN has an **** been considered masking? Never..

Masking is considered intentionally dodging a filter...

There are many ways do that such as making your own letters..

[spoiler]|<?

( (()) (()) |_ ...

Y (()) |_| G3-|- I -|-?[/spoiler]

ALT characters:

[spoiler]†
‡
‡
‰
Š
Œ
™
š
œ
Ÿ
¡
¢
£
¤
¥
¦
§
¨
©
ª
«
¬
®
¯
°
±
¼
½
¾
¿
À
Á
Â
Ã
Ä
Å
Æ
Ç
È
É
Ê
Ë
Ì
Í
Î
Ï
Ð
Ñ
Ò
Ó
Ô
Õ
Ö
×
Ø
Ù
Ú
Û
Ü
Ý
Þ
ß
à
á
â
ã
ä
å
æ
ç
è
ê
ë
ì
í
î
ï
ð
ñ
ò
ó
ô
õ
ö
÷
ø
ù
ú
û
ü
ý
þ
ÿ[/spoiler]

Yet a board warning is issued for use of asterisks? Why not then issue a warning for every use of an asterisk on these forums then?

Such as:
Every time someone corrects themselves.

"I live ni California"

"***in California"

The thousands of PM's posted on these forums similar to that, hell why not warn for every time someone triggers a filter if your going to give a warning for someone copying the in-game filter?

Verbal or not, this is the most ridiculous thing I've read on these forums in some time..

back when we became GM and then admin, there were quite often permabans, and we don't count spambots. These days, there's been only one. Without checking details exactly, we estimate it to be the first permaban in a year or so.

oh, and right now there's 35 people with warnings, for a total of 70-80 warnings. Back in the day, there was page up and page down of warned people... less warnings have been issued recently (last 6 months to year), than were issued 3 years ago. Thus, if mods have gotten so much more strict, where are all the missing warnings? the missing permabans?


EDIT: last permaban on record before "Huxley" just recently was on 2 Aug 2010. Attempts at ban evasion by same user post-permaban not counted. Found 3-4 other permabans not much earlier same year. and a rather high frequency of 6th warning bans. Wont go through records pre-august 2009.

Kikaz wrote:

ربهالنوع wrote:tl;dr Rules did not get stricter, people simply became worse forum members.

The rules may have not gotten stricter but some of the mods definitely did..

Giving a masking warning for asterisks is just absurd, that has always been the games filter, and there are thousands of PM's posted on these forums with them, with no warnings issued.

Seriously since WHEN has an **** been considered masking? Never..

Once again never! We have not and do not warn for using ***. This is not what happend in the OP. Seriously when you reply to a thread read it thoroughly so that replies can be more constructive. If you are going to swear then replace every single letter of the swear word with ***'s and DO NOT replace only a few of the letters, which is exactly what happened in the issue being discussed by the OP.

**** off clarkey

so thats alright over

**Filtered** off clarkey

Clarkey wrote:

Kikaz wrote:

ربهالنوع wrote:tl;dr Rules did not get stricter, people simply became worse forum members.

The rules may have not gotten stricter but some of the mods definitely did..

Giving a masking warning for asterisks is just absurd, that has always been the games filter, and there are thousands of PM's posted on these forums with them, with no warnings issued.

Seriously since WHEN has an **** been considered masking? Never..

Once again never! We have not and do not warn for using ***. This is not what happend in the OP. Seriously when you reply to a thread read it thoroughly so that replies can be more constructive. If you are going to swear then replace every single letter of the swear word with ***'s and DO NOT replace only a few of the letters, which is exactly what happened in the issue being discussed by the OP.

Repli claims one thing and posts what he claims to have posted, Juliette says another thing with no proof other than her saying he WAS masking. Oh noes! So adding the 'in' to the asterisks now constitutes masking?

I did read said thread Clarkey, it's one word vs. another, I'm likely to follow the side with that posted more information.

Guild wrote:**** off clarkey

so thats alright over

**Filtered** off clarkey

That Guild would be considered as self filtering. There is no difference between self filtering and auto filtering. For all I know you could have self filtered piss off.

If you had partially replaced some of the letters with *'s then it would be more obvious you used the word **Filtered**.

But if you constantly go around telling people to **** off don't go crying to mummy if you are warned for profanity.

Kikaz wrote:

Clarkey wrote:

Kikaz wrote:

ربهالنوع wrote:tl;dr Rules did not get stricter, people simply became worse forum members.

The rules may have not gotten stricter but some of the mods definitely did..

Giving a masking warning for asterisks is just absurd, that has always been the games filter, and there are thousands of PM's posted on these forums with them, with no warnings issued.

Seriously since WHEN has an **** been considered masking? Never..

Once again never! We have not and do not warn for using ***. This is not what happend in the OP. Seriously when you reply to a thread read it thoroughly so that replies can be more constructive. If you are going to swear then replace every single letter of the swear word with ***'s and DO NOT replace only a few of the letters, which is exactly what happened in the issue being discussed by the OP.

Repli claims one thing and posts what he claims to have posted, Juliette says another thing with no proof other than her saying he WAS masking. Oh noes! So adding the 'in' to the asterisks now constitutes masking?

I did read said thread Clarkey, it's one word vs. another, I'm likely to follow the side with that posted more information.

The "in" was not added TO the asterisks, the letters besides the "in" were replaced with asterisks. It is clearly an obvious masking incident because there would be absolutely no other reason to asterisk out some of the letters of a word.

So what your saying is because the game didn't filter the whole word, it's masking?

Most idiotic thing I've seen in awhile, warning for the games flawed filter system..

Some words in the filter, when not spelling the whole 'ing' at the end for example 'in' or 'en' 'n' depending on the slang or lack of grammar of the sender.. the game only filters the swear word... Anyone who has ever been in heated wars knows this..

There's many flaws in the games messaging system such as certain words being completely changed into something else, so the receiver of the message has no idea what your trying to say..

If anything Repli should be thanked instead of warned for bringing this to the attention of the mods who obviously have little to no in-game experience..

Kikaz wrote:So what your saying is because the game didn't filter the whole word, it's masking?

Basically **** is allowed, ****in or ****ing or any variation where a letter is not filtered out (allowing someone to guess what the word is), is masking. Regardless of whether it came from ingame or not.

And ingame experience has no relevance to this.

So the mods decided to ignore this for six years, and suddenly bring it to light in 2012 and immediately issue a warning instead of a simple verbal or editing the post explaining this?

Again, there are thousands of PM's on these forums with the same usage, that have never been modded or even gave a 2nd thought.

Your basing warnings on your own imagination now, great job mod team.

Glad to see what this community's come to in recent years.

Kikaz wrote:So the mods decided to ignore this for six years, and suddenly bring it to light in 2012 and immediately issue a warning instead of a simple verbal or editing the post explaining this?

Again, there are thousands of PM's on these forums with the same usage, that have never been modded or even gave a 2nd thought.

Your basing warnings on your own imagination now, great job mod team.

Glad to see what this community's come to in recent years.

Every time I've seen it, I've warned for it. And I'm not about to go back to the posts before I started as a mod, and editing/warning them. As far as previous ones are concerned, this may have been due to old rules, before they were revised?

Section 5. b) has not been changed in YEARS, or if it has it was only re-wording.

Even the current masking definition in the forum rules, does not include what Repli was warned for.

Perhaps it is time to revise the rules, in which case Repli's warning should be reversed.

Simpily adding:
"IF you self-filter or copy paste ingame messages from the filter and leave anything connected to the asterisks, that can help the reader imagine the word than a board warning will be issued. Such as 'in' 'ing' etc."


Current forum rules on this subject:

b. Profanity
The use of all profanity on the SGW forums is prohibited at all times. This means swearing, cursing, and vulgarity. This includes the use of masking. Profanity in images (such as in signatures), videos linked (such as YouTube), or in articles linked is also prohibited.

Note:
Masking is intentionally using characters, HTML tags, or anything else to express a word that would otherwise be filtered; in other words, it's bypassing the filter. Profanity not a part of the main focus of the page being linked (such as advertisements or comments) will not be policed as they can change quickly and easily.


Consequence:
When only minor profanity is used, only a Verbal Warning may be issused. In all other cases a Board Warning will be issued. In the case of Masking a Board Warning will always be issued.

Even your listed consequence was not used in this case, as it was a minor profanity.


My argument has been posted on this matter any post after this or responding to this post I will consider to have:

Haz wrote:no relevance

I don't care to go into detail on the history of forum moderation. But straight up, Kikaz, you're wrong. It's been this way for a long long time. And the issue has been debated ad nauseam not only here in public, but in the mod section as well.

I do agree that the situation is completely **Filtered** retarded for so many reasons. But whatever.

Haz wrote:

Kikaz wrote:So what your saying is because the game didn't filter the whole word, it's masking?

Basically **** is allowed, ****in or ****ing or any variation where a letter is not filtered out (allowing someone to guess what the word is), is masking. Regardless of whether it came from ingame or not.

And ingame experience has no relevance to this.

This is utterly flawed reasoning for the simple fact that one will have just as easy a time figuring out what word is hidden behind ******* as they will ****ing.

Kikaz wrote:Section 5. b) has not been changed in YEARS, or if it has it was only re-wording.

Even the current masking definition in the forum rules, does not include what Repli was warned for.

Perhaps it is time to revise the rules, in which case Repli's warning should be reversed.

Simpily adding:
"IF you self-filter or copy paste ingame messages from the filter and leave anything connected to the asterisks, that can help the reader imagine the word than a board warning will be issued. Such as 'in' 'ing' etc."


Current forum rules on this subject:

b. Profanity
The use of all profanity on the SGW forums is prohibited at all times. This means swearing, cursing, and vulgarity. This includes the use of masking. Profanity in images (such as in signatures), videos linked (such as YouTube), or in articles linked is also prohibited.

Note:
Masking is intentionally using characters, HTML tags, or anything else to express a word that would otherwise be filtered; in other words, it's bypassing the filter. Profanity not a part of the main focus of the page being linked (such as advertisements or comments) will not be policed as they can change quickly and easily.


Consequence:
When only minor profanity is used, only a Verbal Warning may be issused. In all other cases a Board Warning will be issued. In the case of Masking a Board Warning will always be issued.

Even your listed consequence was not used in this case, as it was a minor profanity.


My argument has been posted on this matter any post after this or responding to this post I will consider to have:

Haz wrote:no relevance

One, I doubt it would be seen as minor profanity.

Two, "in the case of masking, a board warning will always be issued".

Three, it is still relevant, as my post is on topic and in reply to your argument. Ingame experience was not relevant as ingame experience has no real connection to how the filter ingame or on forums is set out.

Dovahkiin wrote:This is utterly flawed reasoning for the simple fact that one will have just as easy a time figuring out what word is hidden behind ******* as they will ****ing.

Depending on the context.

Whatever context tells me what word ****ing represents will also tell me what word ******* represents.