< 1 2 >
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
This was a link to a user however the discussion that follows has given me cause to remove it.
Arnt I a sport. Sport?? Football! :D
And just before anyone goes shouting "I agree, that Milky got it well wrong" - this is he editing. :)
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames:
Milkshake : Can anything be done about this.
I just dont think its an acceptable username.
What if he really is one? :-)
I would think that such discussions should be held privately with a site message to Jaxom
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
I cant agree.
My 5 year old niece was on here the other day looking for games.
Whoever chose that name doesnt give a damn about her right not to have words like that shoved in her face so I dont give a damn about 'Groovy Bas***ds' privacy.
Besides its not just this particular user that bothers me.
Its the fact that someone can call themselves that in the first place. Does this mean someone could sign up and call themselves 'Fuc**ty F**k F**k' and then proceed to post?
I'm not complaining. Its just that we have had a fair bit of discussion on using NSFW in titles when it is needed. There is no point having NSFW in a title if the guy who posted the article has a name like that. The damage is already done.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames:
My comment "what if he is one" was tounge-in-cheek, hence the smiley.
I was only saying that much as in Worth we shouldn't discuss other users in the forum.
Such concerns should be discussed with admins via a *private* message.
Contact Jaxom or Galoot in such manners.
At least I assume that would be the steps that should be taken
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
But we are all admins. Thats the point of the site.
It comes down to what everybody thinks. Because of that I think it would be unfair to discuss it privately. If I had a rank of 25 and someone privately asked me to change something Id tell them to put it in the forums to see what everyone else thinks. We're all naked in here.
Edit -
Sorry 2many I should have been clearer. I got the tongue in cheek bit. :)
Also. I think people need to stop seeing this with the same eyes as they see worth. It is a totally different format - this place encourages politics and debate through a range of subjects. Almost the complete opposite of worth.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by BrightonCub:
Once it's decided whether or not we can chat openly about these things, I'll add my two cents. For the time being there's too many toes to step on!
Until then, can somebody tell me what NSFW means?
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames:
We debate about things yet. We can have civil discourses on a number of subjects.
However, the proper thing in a public forum is to just discuss the use of so-called nsfw usernames. Do not single a person out publicly, that is rude and inconsiderate and unecessary.
Just because we can discuss politics here doesn't mean we can discuss individuals and our opinion of them publicly.
No one appreciates being complained about in such a public manner.
Basically, yes discuss and debate all you want. But do so in general terms. There is no need to single out a certain user.
And, no, we are not all "admins" yes, higher rank will give you more controll over the site, but that doesn't make one an "admin".
Plus higher ranks such as 25 would be extremely difficult to get to with just votes since only 1 vote per member counts.
That being said, I have never understood the concept of "dirty words". The whole idea is inane. Who is it that arbitrarily got together and decided that this word is bad and that is not.
Bastard is bad, but orphan isn't? Both dictate a familial situation
Shit is evil but shoot isn't? Both mean exactly the same thing. Frick, fork, darn, gosh darn, etc are all acceptable? They mean exactly what the so-called "dirty words" mean.
There is no difference. What really is the difference in "I must deficate" and "I gotta shit"? One may sound more base, but Evil? I don't see it.
Don't know of any religious book that says "Thou shalt not say Shit!"
Okay, you got the part about the lord's name in there, but again if that is the case, "gosh darn" or even "gosh" should be just as bad as it means the same thing
Almost all of the "dirty words" were perfectly acceptable at one time. Many of them were replaced by newer words (usually from the conquering tribe). The older words had a "peasant" or uneducated stigma since the new rulers used different words.
That doesn't mean they are evil. They are words. There is no reason why any of them should be considered bad.
However, I know I am in the minority in this opinion so I will drop it.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames:
BrightonCub : Once it's decided whether or not we can chat openly about these things, I'll add my two cents. For the time being there's too many toes to step on!
Until then, can somebody tell me what NSFW means?
"NSFW" means Not Safe For Work
As I mentioned above there is no reason to discuss a certain user name. Everything can be discussed in generic terms in the open forums.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
Bastard is bad, but orphan isn't? Both dictate a familial situation
Thats like saying 'sex' is the same word as 'fu*k'
It isnt at all - it comes down to usage. Youre trying to be clever.
No one appreciates being complained about in such a public manner.
If a person doesnt want to be complained about in a public manner then they shouldnt push stuff like this into peoples faces. Me bringing this name up is no where near as rude as choosing that name in the first place.
And, no, we are not all "admins" yes, higher rank will give you more controll over the site, but that doesn't make one an "admin".
Sorry, but I got that phrase from Jax himself. He's said it a number of times. (Not excactly those words but he has said it.)
-----------------------------------
That user name was chosen knowing it would be seen in a public forum.
My reaction - complain in a public forum.
Also, i've seen so many forum discussions where some idiot has started swearing and coming out with uncouth and uneducated speil. They get chastised in public for it by the other members.
Whats the difference?
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
Just a side note 2many.
Im not trying to argue here. Its good that we both have diff opinions as it brings it out in the open.
:)
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by tomphoolry:
We're all admins (I think) in the sense that we can have a say in how the site looks, by voting on members, etc. The overall look and tone of Plime and how we conduct ourselves and how we police the site, up to a degree. Where we're not admins is the ability to censor or ban each other. For that, there has to be a specific number of people on the site that have that ability, responsibility and authority. That's something that can't be left up to the public, so to speak. There would soon be anarchy. If someone wants to speak about this specific type of situation in the forums, then I think we should not get into specific member names. If someone gets bothered enough by a situation, then by all means, name the member to an admin by message, but don't post it publicly. I love the fact that we can have open, honest discussions here without evolving into flame wars (which this one isn't, but others could very easily and very quickly), but one of the ways to do that is to not call out people by name or start name calling in the public forum.
P.S. Milkshake, I personally agree with you 100% on offensive names, but I would have done what 2many suggested. Messaged Jax with the specifics and then just opened a topic here to talk about offensive member names in general without actually naming anyone. Plime is still in its infancy and we're all still feeling our way. But that's just my opinion and its like a you-know-what. Everybody's got one and they usually smell.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames:
Milkshake : Just a side note 2many.
Im not trying to argue here. Its good that we both have diff opinions as it brings it out in the open.
:)
I agree that one shouldn't use nsfw words as usernames. My point was just that those words shouldn't be considered nsfw. They are just arbitraily chosen to be "naughty" and there is no difference betweed Damn and Darn. Even in useage as you mentioned they are the same thing. Why is one bad and the other isn't?
But since they are considered to be "naughty" by 99.99% of the people than you are right they shouldn't be used. I am in complete agreement there.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
A good debate, and two points well made I hope.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
Tom I understand what you are saying.
But nobody chooses a name like that without knowing it is offensive so the intention was to be offensive.
I fail to see why I should feel/show any consideration at all.
Thats just me.
One last thing.
This is a news & interesting article site. We are ALL commenting on people and situations all day every day in a public manner.
How can we act like it is ok to comment on people and then say dont comment on people?
Members or not.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by MonkMojo:
Good discussion.
I think Milkshake should change his name based on some definitions here: (nsfw)
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Galoot:
Don't confuse "safe for work" with "safe for children." This isn't Disneyland, and nowhere does it say Plime is a site designed for five-year-olds.
Also, by singling out this user and linking to his profile, you've just made it more likely that a "bad word" will pop up on our screens. A PM to the boss would have avoided that.
Debate is welcome here, but I don't think witch hunts are, and singling people out can easily lead to that. PM jax.
As far as I'm aware, nobody but jax himself can change a user's name or other details. I certainly can't, and I hope that's not a "feature" that will be given out lightly to anyone.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by tomphoolry:
Milkshake : Tom I understand what you are saying.
But nobody chooses a name like that without knowing it is offensive so the intention was to be offensive.
I fail to see why I should feel/show any consideration at all.
Thats just me.
One last thing.
This is a news & interesting article site. We are ALL commenting on people and situations all day every day in a public manner.
How can we act like it is ok to comment on people and then say dont comment on people?
Members or not.
Don't disagree with you. But do we want this to be a place of considerate discussion? While in this specific situation, it might not be a big deal to cite the User Name that bothered you, maybe the next discussion pushes the envelope a little further and feelings get hurt? This thread and the reparations thread are perfect examples of how to present different viewpoints in a calm, constructive manner. But I've seen other sites where there is lawlessness because rude or obnoxious behaviour, statements and namecalling were allowed to go unchecked. One tiny thing can quickly snowball. This is a place open to anyone with access to the net. All races, creeds, colors, politics, preferences, etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum. While many will be offended by this particular user name, some will wonder "What's the big deal? That's not offensive." I think potentially inflammatory situations should be kept under controll by keeping names out of the public (if you're trying to report something that you think is wrong). If you want to praise, name away. If you want to blame, report it privately and let the authorities handle it. (I just reread this and it sounds like I'm trying to dictate what should be done on this site. I'm not. This is just my opinion and I'm just a user like anyone else.)
I say if something bothers a member, definately call it to someones attention. I'm definately not advocating just letting it go. I'm just asking that caution be exercised as to whether you call it out privately to powers to be or to open it to discussion in public.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
Ok fellas.
Fair shout.
Will change theory on internet etiquette regarding topics of this nature as of this moment forthwith.
Thats a gesture of goodwill. Nothing else ;)
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
MonkMojo : Good discussion.
I think Milkshake should change his name based on some definitions here: (nsfw)
Well thats just effin great innit!! :D
Milkshake it is. And Milkshake it stays.
Comes from boxing when I was young. Always had a milkshake. It kinda stuck from there.
But hey, if anyone ever wants to put me down, theres yer link. ;)
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Bornbad:
I think shake is allowed to disagree with a users name if it crosses the line with him. I'm more of a WTF, who cares person about language. I let my sons listen to George Carlin before they were teenagers. They're just fine today. I have more of a problem with people posting tons stories consecuitively off the Yahoo home page.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by Milkshake:
This is niglin me now.
If we are going to start saying you can or cant do this or that then this site needs a definite admin system in place. Something you can point to and say "Those are the admins names and those are the rules they look after."
Otherwise this thread (and similar issues) will be repeated over and over by new users and they can't be blamed if it doesnt state anywhere that they are doing anything wrong.
Also, I know this site doesnt say anywhere that it is designed for 5 year olds but it also doesnt say anything to the contrary. In my experience, if there are no warnings then that in itself is a statement that the site is safe for everyone.
Change of subject.
About what Bornbad has just mentioned. It is a very good point about not just copying and pasting every story you see on one site. If I thought that was ok, id just throw 100 posts a day here straight from google news.
I think a bit of thought behind the posts should be encouraged.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
< 1 2 >