Reminder: global rules, roleplaying, and sexual interaction

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

Whether or not the said adults are consenting is not the point though. It's already been established that any and all PM contacts between members are to remain, at most, PG-13. If actual consenting adults want to engage in sexual role-play, that is fine. They just have to take it to Skype, Yahoo, or some other board that allows that.

This sort of thing is something I can't really say I agree with. Just because "it's the rules" doesn't necessarily make it right in the slightest. It's possible to have abusive laws and regulations, and stuff like this is something I feel is treading into that territory. 

 

So, yeahh. Just because it's the rules only means we need to follow them. Doesn't necessarily mean it's a good thing. 

 

 

 

The point is that it's way too easy to assume that one is of age, and in fact be wrong. Unless you face cam with them, you aren't going to know if they are, in fact, of age. To cover their buts and to make sure this board is accessible and safe to anyone 13 & up, the mods & admins have to go to these measures.

 

To answer your question, I do think it's fair because it's outlined. PG-13, no hire, and there is no guarantee that the messages are to be private.

So punishing groups of people and stripping them of their privacy is acceptable because some people lie? Since when? That isn't cool nor acceptable in my eyes, yet it's a rule. The "punish the ones who are in the right for those who are in the wrong" mindset is something that's a bit archaic and *not* a good thing to do. Why not just punish those in the wrong? But if the staff keeps setting forth rules like this, pretty soon we won't be able to say "goddammit" without getting slapped with 250 WPs.

[EpitomeOfTruth 243]

 

 

Congratulations, you just said the most ridiculous thing I have heard in this entire thread and that is saying something. The reason posting on the forums themselves is worse should be obvious, anyone can see including children and even just people that don't want to see it while in PM's at the very least it can only be seen by the people involved in said PM. It is not a conspiracy to cover tracks it is simply good manners to I don't know not post it where children or people who don't want to see it will likely see it.

 

 

I think that the opponents of this policy are missing one major point: Such content isn't allowed, private or otherwise.

 

Saying those who do it in private shouldn't receive equal punishment is absurd. Should the guy doing drugs in his basment not be treated the same way as someone who does it in a back alley.

[Allen 1,389]

As mentioned above, admins, staff and moderators can restrict harassment or hurting people's feelings on MLP forums.  That's a good thing to remember on this thread, @SCS.

[EpitomeOfTruth 243]

 

 

So punishing groups of people and stripping them of their privacy is acceptable because some people lie? Since when? That isn't cool nor acceptable in my eyes, yet it's a rule. The "punish the ones who are in the right for those who are in the wrong" mindset is something that's a bit archaic and *not* a good thing to do. Why not just punish those in the wrong? But if the staff keeps setting forth rules like this, pretty soon we won't be able to say "goddammit" without getting slapped with 250 WPs.

 

 

You say that like you had privacy to begin with. Even still, the ones who are in the right are not being punished.

[DaReaper 1,945]

It's a sad, sad day when this has to be an announcement. This should be commen sense but then again so should don't text while driving

[Dattebayo 2,850]

The staff are excellent decision makers, and I applaud them finally enforcing a rule that is should be common sense to everybody.

Hopefully now, we can all enjoy this community without worrying of sneaky happenings that we can't see and don't effect us personally.

 

I hope those pesky rascals will think twice before doing it again. I hope they get, like, SUPERpermabanned.

 

There. Can I be a moderator now?

Edited October 11, 2014 by Dattebayo

[Thrashy 2,800]

 

Saying those who do it in private shouldn't receive equal punishment is absurd. Should the guy doing drugs in his basment not be treated the same way as someone who does it in a back alley.

 

 

Speaking of absurd, that analogy leaves a lot to be desired.

[EpitomeOfTruth 243]

 

 

Speaking of absurd, that analogy leaves a lot to be desired.

 

 

Could you elaborate, as I have a hard time seeing a problem with it.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

 

Could you elaborate, as I have a hard time seeing a problem with it.

Because we're talking about NSFW IN PMs, not snorting coke in in a back alley with Crazy Pete, who likes to bite.

 

Your analogy leaves much to be desired in the analogous department.

 

You can argue that one is just as bad, whatever...just think of something not absurd.

People are starting to stare.

Edited October 11, 2014 by Dattebayo

[Felix 1,363]

Just to put it out there:

 

Wether you agree with their moderation or not...it cannot be changed. I'm not trying to say it's wrong people have opinions here and are uncomfortable with this but fact is this is how this site is moderated and it will forever stay that way so long as their age and rating restrictions stay,

[EpitomeOfTruth 243]

 

 

Because we're talking about NSFW IN PMs, not snorting coke in in a back alley with Crazy Pete, who likes to bite. Your analogy leaves much to be desired in the analogous department.

 

 

Wrong is wrong. Plain and simple. When the rules say don't do something, you abide by those rules.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

Just to put it out there:

 

Wether you agree with their moderation or not...it cannot be changed. I'm not trying to say it's wrong people have opinions here and are uncomfortable with this but fact is this is how this site is moderated and it will forever stay that way so long as their age and rating restrictions stay,

The sad truth.

 

It was a stretch to overturn BNSFw. I should know. I was a part of the paltry group who actively campaigned for it's removal.

But something tells me...THIS is here to stay. Whatever. It's gonna happen.

 

Again though, doesn't mean i have to like it.

[Ashen Pathfinder 16,163]

This sort of thing is something I can't really say I agree with. Just because "it's the rules" doesn't necessarily make it right in the slightest. It's possible to have abusive laws and regulations, and stuff like this is something I feel is treading into that territory. 

 

So, yeahh. Just because it's the rules only means we need to follow them. Doesn't necessarily mean it's a good thing. 

 

 

 

So punishing groups of people and stripping them of their privacy is acceptable because some people lie? Since when? That isn't cool nor acceptable in my eyes, yet it's a rule. The "punish the ones who are in the right for those who are in the wrong" mindset is something that's a bit archaic and *not* a good thing to do. Why not just punish those in the wrong? But if the staff keeps setting forth rules like this, pretty soon we won't be able to say "goddammit" without getting slapped with 250 WPs.

 

I won't dispute what an individual believe is right or wrong with the rules as they are. While I understand your viewpoint, I still have to strongly disagree with it.

 

To me, these are the right steps. Nothing more, nothing less. Again, erotic role play in PM is still forbidden and as such deserves any said ban. It is banned because there is the chance that illicit activity might occur, and the board could get in real trouble over it.

 

Honestly, I see nothing wrong with the policy, but we'll have to agree to disagree on that mark, I believe.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

 

Wrong is wrong. Plain and simple. When the rules say don't do something, you abide by those rules.

It's so much easier to see the world in black in white...

Gray? I don't know what to do with gray.

Edited October 11, 2014 by Dattebayo

[Thrashy 2,800]

 

 

Could you elaborate, as I have a hard time seeing a problem with it.

 

 

You're having a hard time seeing the problem comparing pictures that lack the power to hurt anyone to drug abuse?

 

Well, I don't know if I can help you there. But I'll try.

 

Problem being that you're confusing "illegal/against the rules" with "harmful". Regardless of what you may think about clop art personally, the fact remains that adults who consent to sharing 'questionable' pics amongst themselves behind closed doors aren't harming a soul, least of all themselves. Breaking rules? Yes, technically. But if they're careful not to allow minors into their midst, careful not to publicly allude to their discreet activities...then what's honestly the problem?

 

Other than "it's just against the rules", I mean. That holds about as much water for me as "gay marriage is just an abomination, okay? Just trust us on this."

 

...Of course, I may have just made my own questionable analogy, but I digress.

[EpitomeOfTruth 243]

 

 

You're having a hard time seeing the problem comparing pictures that lack the power to hurt anyone to drug abuse?   Well, I don't know if I can help you there. But I'll try.   Problem being that you're confusing "illegal/against the rules" with "harmful". Regardless of what you may think about clop art personally, the fact remains that adults who consent to sharing 'questionable' pics amongst themselves behind closed doors aren't harming a soul, least of all themselves. Breaking rules? Yes, technically. But if they're careful not to allow minors into their midst, careful not to publicly allude to their discreet activities...then what's honestly the problem?   Other than "it's just against the rules", I mean. That holds about as much water for me as "gay marriage is just an abomination, okay? Just trust us on this."   ...Of course, I may have just made my own questionable analogy, but I digress.

 

 

My comparison may have been a little extreme, but my point still stands. It wouldn't be against the rules if there wasn't a perfectly legitimate reason for it. It's not about whats harmful or not, it's simply a matter of respect, and deliberately going against what has been established shows a lack of it. It's like when I go to my aunt's house and she doesn't let me sit on the nice looking furniture. In my mind I'm all "Why not that's what furniture is for", but I still abide because it is a set rule in her house, leaving me no room to debate.

 

Just because something illegal/against the rules isn't harmful, doesn't mean it OK.

[Thrashy 2,800]

 

Just because something illegal/against the rules isn't harmful, doesn't mean it OK.

 

 

...In the opinion of you and like-minded people. I happen to come from the camp that says we should question silly and pointless restrictions on the responsible exercise of personal freedoms that in no way negatively impact anyone.

 

The most inane thing a man can ever do with his life is blindly accept everything that's presented to him without ever even bothering to ask questions about it. The fear of questioning authority is what kept people believing Earth was the flat center of the universe for eons.

 

 

 

It's not about whats harmful or not, it's simply a matter of respect, and deliberately going against what has been established shows a lack of it.

 

I cannot even decide where to begin with this.

 

All throughout history there have been countless examples of "that what [sic] has been established" simply being wrong. The only way mankind has managed to grow as a species has been through ousting old conventional "wisdom", old status quos, old ways of doing things that did nothing but actively hold back our advancement and, in many cases, actively harm individuals merely based on what they believed. Or worse, what they were biologically equipped with.

 

Questioning the validity of the status quo doesn't show a lack of respect towards those who established it. Not questioning it shows a distinct lack of will to think for yourself and, therefore, disrespects yourself.

[EpitomeOfTruth 243]

 

 

..In the opinion of you and like-minded people. I happen to come from the camp that says we should question silly and pointless restrictions on the responsible exercise of personal freedoms that in no way negatively impact anyone.   The most inane thing a man can ever do with his life is blindly accept everything that's presented to him without ever even bothering to ask questions about it. The fear of questioning authority is what kept people believing Earth was the flat center of the universe.

 

 

Of course you should question silly and outlandish restrictions. Right now though, you're questioning one that makes a lot of sense.

 

I don't, nor will I ever just accept what is presented to me. I accept (most) current laws, rules, and restrictions because I have asked questions, and the answers made sense.

 

 

 

I cannot even decide where to begin with this.   All throughout history there have been countless examples of "that what [sic] has been established" simply being wrong. The only way mankind has managed to grow as a species has been through ousting old conventional "wisdom", old status quos, old ways of doing things that did nothing but actively hold back our advancement and, in many cases, actively harm individuals merely based on what they believed. Or worse, what they were biologically equipped with.   Questioning the validity of the status quo doesn't show a lack of respect towards those who established it. Not questioning it shows a distinct lack of will to think for yourself and, therefore, disrespects yourself. 

 

 

Again, we're not talking about civil rights or anything like that. What we are discussing is something as simple as obeying the "No smoking" sign and taking it to a place where it would be more appropriate.

[Banul 3,831]

Problem being that you're confusing "illegal/against the rules" with "harmful". Regardless of what you may think about clop art personally, the fact remains that adults who consent to sharing 'questionable' pics amongst themselves behind closed doors aren't harming a soul, least of all themselves. Breaking rules? Yes, technically. But if they're careful not to allow minors into their midst, careful not to publicly allude to their discreet activities...then what's honestly the problem?

 

The problem is that the mods and admins can't know who is and isn't a minor. This is important, as the forum claims to be safe for minors. Logistically, it doesn't matter if both sides are actually adults are not. The mods just can't know that for sure, so they need to prevent everyone from sexual RP in the PM system across the board. That way, they can be sure they don't end up on Dateline NBC's To Catch a Predator. I'm sure that with the whole NSA thing going around, that is particular threatening to them. I'm no lawyer and I won't claim to have a solid grasp of law, but I'm sure that allowing people to engage in NSFW stuff on a 13+ site, even behind the closed doors of the messaging system, presents legal problems for the staff here.

 

I don't care about adult RP. I'm a clopper myself. If you're into that, cool. Keep being into that. However, this just isn't the place for it, its pretty up front about that when you sign up. Its against the rules, its always been against the rules, and if you try it in the messaging system you're taking a risk that you probably don't need to take. Just take it to Skype or something.

 

You want to share your porn? Please do! Sexual Rp? Have at it! But do it in a place where it isn't specifically against the rules, because it presents problems that the staff probably don't want to deal with.

 

 

 

P.S.

 

I feel that I need to reiterate that nobody's privacy is being violated. The mods arn't reading through peoples PM's, they're stating that they have the power to respond to PM's that have been reported.

 

I think that if the mods were the kind of people that would snoop through your messages, they would't have ever brought it up in the first place.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

I heard this all started because two people were doing sexy Rps, and one of them (the minor) wanted to do some scary hardcore sh&t (like rape and stuff) and the other backed out because it didn't feel right, and the minor reported the other dude out of spite.

[EpitomeOfTruth 243]

 

 

I heard this all started because two people were doing sexy Rps, and one of them (the minor) wanted to do some scary hardcore sh&t (like rape and stuff) and the other backed out because it didn't feel right, and the minor reported the other dude out of spite.

 

 

I should not have found that funny. But whatever.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

 

 

I should not have found that funny. But whatever.

It is funny. In the dark "god is dead, there is no justice in this world" kind of way.

I also heard the minor walked away pretty much unscathed and the other dude was permabanned. He is still awaiting an appeal.

[Dark Qiviut 22,527]

What's alarming is the fact that this had to come out. The rules have been global ever since before I joined this place. It was mentioned specifically in the Global Rules before I registered this site two years ago. The concept of PM's being reviewed after they were reported has been something I've known since my early days as a forum-goer. I rarely do it, but I have reported PMs before. In fact, I've done it three times, once on here (reported the same PM twice because the user told me off and wouldn't quit spilling his angst against me onto his status), twice on other forums.

 

The fact that people are either harassed sending lewd content to others via PM is more than incentive to give the staff the restrained ability to look through specific PMs if given the license to do so. If a user reports someone's PM for sending a harassing or death threat (including encouragement of suicide), and the staff ignores it, then the administration could be in a world of trouble legally. Moderators and administrators are one-hundred-percent responsible for their safety while the members are on the forums, and members are entitled to visit the forums feeling safe and knowing the staff always has their backs. If keeping members safe means searching through PMs and banning the perpetrator (including contacting the police and pressing charges), then so be it.

Edited October 11, 2014 by Dark Qiviut

[Banul 3,831]

I heard this all started because two people were doing sexy Rps, and one of them (the minor) wanted to do some scary hardcore sh&t (like rape and stuff) and the other backed out because it didn't feel right, and the minor reported the other dude out of spite.

I hope the minor got the boot too, then. It's pretty lame to throw someone under the bus like that because they weren't comfortable with where it was going.

 

 

'Course, it seems like just a rumor at this point anyway.

Edited October 11, 2014 by Banul

[Dattebayo 2,850]

I hope the minor got the boot too, then. It's pretty lame to throw someone under the bus like that because they weren't comfortable with where it was going.

I know a dude who's been in appeal with no response since June.

My crystal ball says it ain't happening any time soon.

'Course, it seems like just a rumor at this point anyway.

Came straight from the other guy's mouth, the part about the minor being into that stuff and pushing it on the other guy.

The rest, him being reported out of spite, I've heard around here, so THAT may be tumors.

 

But seriously, how else would have the staff known otherwise if the minor didn't report it? They've already sworn they don't pop in willy nilly, and I find it odd that the minor would grow a conscience after being turned away by the other dude, like "oh lordy, I have sinned, cleanse me mods, of my infractions".

Edited October 11, 2014 by Dattebayo