Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Lynn

Is no one else worried by the dangerous precedent being set by the moderation team?

Recommended Posts

when art have a controvertial theme, or exploit a situation to send a message, one must ask itself if the context for the message to unfold was coherent or forced.

In this case, and on some of the previous mentioned, the author is exploiting the medieval setting, full of inequality and sexism, to show his thoughts.

In Russia, Pussy Riot is feminist band and political group that fights against sexism and dictatorship, and advocates for equality and LGBT rights.

An easter egg showing the torture of a member of this band is a clear message.

OK, fine, it his opinion. We are adults we can tolerate that.

But we won't have to tolerate that this person uses and abuses the art medium for sending reiterative messages always about the same theme. He know it,  so he hide it as an easter egg...

Read between the lines, the obsession is clear.

 

Unfortunately, the flame war will persist as there are people that can't separate the art from the missbehaviour or tolerate any kind of censorship, as it is assumed by some.

 

But things could have been different, i think.

 

Things could have been disscused privately first, between the involved parts, and then made public if there was an agreement or not.

 

We are using avatars and nicknames, we can change it and thats it, i'm not that bad guy anymore.

But in real life, publicly bashing someone ideologies or declaring oneself in favor of controversial topics has consequenses far more outreageous than ethical justice for both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, dr_st said:

I went through Google's cache to see the removed posts and what the fuss was about. It immediately became obvious that the easter egg in question which triggered the whole mess, in itself, is very benign. None of the eye-rollers would have cared, for instance, if Lara Croft had been replaced with, say, Indiana Jones.

 

I'm pretty sure there actually is at least one .wad out there with a tortured (or at least badly mutilated) Indiana Jones. I can certainly think of several wads with specifically named corpses (RTC-3057, for instance).

 

Like others have said, context is the key, plus times change and just because something was once acceptable doesn't mean it is now - the current purging of old TV shows with blackface being a good example.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, seed said:

When I said that I was thinking along the lines of "what if the characters would be male instead? Or both male and female? Or none? Would it be different? And how?"

I suppose that if that scene was made with generic male victim the pattern familiarity either wouldn't even kick in or manifest itself with "Shadowman -> torture" link, but what do I know lol.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, SuperCupcakeTactics said:

Also please do not put words in my mouth I don't appreciate that. I do appreciate the rest of your reply though!

You're right that you didn't actually say that. The thing you said that I quoted seemed, to me, very dismissive of people who agreed with Not Jabba's moderation decision, in that it was another "it's only a videogame!" type post. I believe you if you say that's not what you actually meant, though.

Share this post


Link to post

@ tumorboards dipshits in general:

 

I don't think "this guy repeatedly makes misogynistic torture porn easter eggs" is the free speech flashpoint you guys want it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Phobus said:

My bigger concern with how both that thread and this thread went is that, if anybody who is also registered on Doomer Boards chimes in on a thread here where there's some controversy, the moderators seem to immediately assume their being registered on DB has something to do with their post or opinion (and it's immediately mentioned). We're not some anti-doominati hive mind working like some sort of alt-right bot net or whatever! For the majority of us (he says, speaking for a collective, immediately undermining his own point), it's essentially a high-output mapping team, that happens to have roots on a forum that has some long-standing members with ridiculous views on politics and tends to draw people that are banned from here. 

Have you ever been targeted for your DB membership personally, or are you springing into action on behalf of your ingroup? You're obviously talking about my dig into gaspe, who 1) is very much a part of the outspoken political wing of DB, 2) dug into me with a "you" that implied I'm either hiveminding with Not Jabba, or trying to stir controversy myself by dissecting his own provocative post.

 

As we continue this conversation, DB is in the process of mocking Not Jabba with jokes that could be interpreted as transphobic, a trait deeply baked into DB's identity. No one is blanket targeting DB members, but you cannot expect chaste silence about DB's politics. It's a cross you chose to bear.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I don't think we're too worried about freedom of speech here. After all, you're free to shitpost as much as you like, apparently, @Grain of Salt.

 

@dew snuck in under the radar there as I was replying to GoS. I've not, no, but as the moderators speak with the authority of Doomworld, and I've seen you dig into gaspe (who was taking a contrarian POV, I'll grant you), as well as bringing us up for (as far as I can tell) no reason earlier in this very thread (vertigo responded) and Not Jabba refer to "Doomer Boards Apologists", I feel like the language used is decidedly "blanket targeting".

 

I don't expect chaste silence about the idiots on DB, any more than I expect the moderation over there to stop the idiots from doing exactly what you're describing, given 40oz' policy and darknation being the sole moderator. I'd rather that it didn't appear to be an official Doomworld moderator position that we need to be careful about what other forums we're on. The "mapping team" members of DB outnumber the idiots, and the DBPs are open and welcoming to all comers. The worst members there don't define us any more than the worst members here. If anything, it's the moderators that define what kind of forum it is.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the general thrust of events over the last day or two. I used to moderate the ZDoom forums for a bit and didn't enjoy the experience, so I respect the difficulty and balance required - particularly as this is a much larger and more active forum. My whole point is that, if this is meant to be the main hub of Doom activity and a welcoming place for all, then people need to be taken on their own merits, rather than lumped in with the worst of a particular group. I currently have the distinct impression that, if ever I feel strongly on a subject and I'm not going with the consensus here, I'll be taken for a DB agitator and can expect to be treated no better than the worst members on that forum.

Edited by Phobus : I thought about it a little more.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Phobus said:

My bigger concern with how both that thread and this thread went is that, if anybody who is also registered on Doomer Boards chimes in on a thread here where there's some controversy, the moderators seem to immediately assume their being registered on DB has something to do with their post or opinion (and it's immediately mentioned). We're not some anti-doominati hive mind working like some sort of alt-right bot net or whatever! For the majority of us (he says, speaking for a collective, immediately undermining his own point), it's essentially a high-output mapping team, that happens to have roots on a forum that has some long-standing members with ridiculous views on politics and tends to draw people that are banned from here.

There's a saying that goes, "You are not responsible for what your friends do, but you will be judged by the company you keep." People have a lot of reasons for being on the Doomer Boards, and personally I don't begrudge anyone for being a part of that community. But in the 15 minutes or so I lurked around there, I found several statements that I thought were pretty vile, and that went completely unchallenged, including by at least one person that has contributed to recent DBP wads. And that kind of association carries some weight.

 

I'm not trying to say anything about you (or anyone else on DW) in particular, and I definitely don't want to suggest that everyone on DB share all the same views. But when the people who are on DB and DW weigh in with opinions that seem like they would be approved by those "long-standing members with ridiculous views on politics," if phrased considerably more civilly than they would do it, I can see how it would be easy -- especially for mods that had a hand in banning those people from here in the first place -- to think that being on DB in fact does have a lot to do with those opinions.

Share this post


Link to post

Putting my vote on "not worried."

I find myself often conflicted about such things. I'm very much anti-censorship in general, but I'm also a hardcore feminist. I don't have a weak stomach, I'm able to watch and appreciate films like Ichi the Killer, which does have extreme torture and rape in it. However, the point is to disturb the viewer, not arouse them.

Anyway, I haven't seen the easter-egg and I didn't care to play the mod even before hearing about it. I think an important thing to note is that it's supposed to be a reward. People don't hide things in secrets because they think they are normal. It obviously wasn't a coincidence that Lara appears only in this one secret. The image was placed there on purpose. It's not just a part of the scenery. It's a statement. Specifically, it's a reward to the player for finding the secret. To me this is a clear indicator of Shadowman's intent: to sneak and fetishize an image that he knows is inappropriate even in the context of the mod itself. Zero props to Shadowman for trying to sneak through his "art" in secret. Zero props for "standing his ground" when he already had to hide behind the veil of a normal mod like a coward. If it's so important to him, maybe he should make a mod where tortured women is the central theme. But, he knows that won't be popular except among other creeps, so he probably won't do it.

Share this post


Link to post

So basically, some guro-fetishist with an exhibitionist kink started posting his secret-porn .wads to get off on seeing the Downloads number get higher and higher? Uh... that's fucked up.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Man, how the hell did this become a thread about Doomer Boards? Haven't we done this enough times by now?

 

 

Ah, fuck it..

 

1 hour ago, Phobus said:

My whole point is that, if this is meant to be the main hub of Doom activity and a welcoming place for all, then people need to be taken on their own merits, rather than lumped in with the worst of a particular group. I currently have the distinct impression that, if ever I feel strongly on a subject and I'm not going with the consensus here, I'll be taken for a DB agitator and can expect to be treated no better than the worst members on that forum.

For a little while I had this worry as well, even though my DB post history shows me being clearly outspoken against most of the politics there, but regardless I haven't been "disowned" or "punished" or anything like that by Doomworld staff - or on the whole - just for posting over there. At worst, I had a few people question why I subjected myself to such dumb political arguments, but the truth is I get a kick out of engaging in that stuff once in a while. After all, how do you know where you stand if you never argue your positions? The point is, never have I been penalized for my time on DB in any meaningful way.

To be clear, I have a feeling a couple of idiots who I don't like anyway might still hold my desire to argue left-leaning points in a largely right-leaning forum against me - for whatever reason - but beyond that it's not (inherently) an albatross around my neck. Especially in your case Phobus, where I struggle to recall you ever saying or doing anything that hinted towards bad intentions/bad faith, or leaned toward "bannable behavior" in any way, at least not to me.

Among the thinking Doomers who have wasted brain cells turning this topic over in their minds, there is an understanding that some DB alums are only in it for the Dooming and modding, and that some others are actually in the "I waste my time arguing against the moronic transphobic/racist/etc crap that sometimes comes up over there" camp, as I was and may be again at some future time. However, for some people, it's (understandably) hard to forget that DB was founded basically as a place to host the political shitstorms that Doomworld no longer wanted. That was the main crux of the founding of Dumbworld. I saw it with my own two eyes, and don't let anyone tell you different. Another sad truth is, there are a handful of users over there who have said some completely heinous, hateful trash. I don't think that reflects the majority of the board users though.

Another point of consideration is that, with the rebranding to Doomer Boards from Dumbworld, there was also a clear push to actually have genuine Doomy stuff and projects going on over there - hence the DBPs were born. I have never once seen anything I considered objectionable in the DBPs either. It's a very clear case where the art does not reflect the politics of certain old DB users - and in truth, most of the people who hold abhorrent views have never actually taken part in the DBPs that I'm aware of. From what I've seen, most Doomworld staffers understand that merely existing on DB or participating in the DBPs is not the same as condoning the hateful crap that some users might come out with.


 

 

Anyway, tl;dr - Unless you actively try to start shit or say things with the direct intent of targeting other users (which would be very out of character for you based on our past experiences) then you'll be fine. Maybe someone will snap at you or something when things get heavily opinionated like they have here, but that's all.

 

This is just my read on the situation, of course.

 

Edited by Doomkid

Share this post


Link to post

I'm also anti-censorship. Which doesn't mean anything because this isn't censorship. An user repeatedly and consistently acted in a way that cheesed off the community and the mods simply told him to stop doing that, they didn't remove the WAD immediately and they're not preventing him from uploading it on any other website.
The "drama" is overblown and is drawing unwarranted attention to a project that would have gotten maybe a third of the attention its getting if it had never happened, Doomworld should know this better than anyone.

Share this post


Link to post

Yep. This whole thing has happened about a wad that came straight up against the forum rules you are supposed to be accepting when entering.

It isn't even about free speach. It is a fetishistic depiction that delivers nothing whatsoever and will disgust or offend people. That's why it's not accepted.

Share this post


Link to post

If you look at this impartially, you'll find... nothing much.

Now look at this very topic - it is clearly just an attempt to attack Doomworld's integrity by cherry-picking one issue and jumping into conclusions - if not outright building a straw man image. Classic "mods gay" drama.

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone else think we should continue the trend of shitting all over free speech and close this thread?

 

The logic is this: it kinda seems like there have now been multiple arguments both for and against what happened, some using different rationales than others, but ultimately people have said their pieces. I'm not an EE mod so it's really not my place to call it, but I'd hate to see this thread devolve into pure shit-slinging, but it seems highly likely as well. I seriously doubt someone is going to come up with the magical golden argument that suddenly makes Not Jabba (and any other mods) suddenly be like "oh, you're right! Deary me! Let's reinstate the torture porn wad posthaste!", so the only other possible outcome is a bunch of ridiculous arguments where people start spinning their wheels in the mud, page after page, making slight variations on the arguments they've already made, all the while convincing no one who wasn't already convinced, and only furthering the potential for needless intra and inter-community fracturing.

 

It's a tired old act that all the long time members have surely seen play out enough times to make them sick at the thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Doom64hunter said:

This drama is almost as hilarious as the time ZDoom lost its shit over a Zombie shooting himself.


As in a zombieman? That sounds hilarious. Details?

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, Doomkid said:

Does anyone else think we should continue the trend of shitting all over free speech and close this thread?

 

I second this, this thread has outlived it original reason to exist as the OP already said his question were answered in the second page.

 

So please, its time to end this now and close this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
57 minutes ago, Gustavo6046 said:

it is clearly just an attempt to attack Doomworld's integrity by cherry-picking one issue and jumping into conclusions

You know, I don't think so. I think the original poster (Lynn) was genuinely unhappy about how this particular situation was handled by the mods.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, xdarkmasterx said:

I'd just like to ask something: If this were about a male character (say, Caleb from Blood, or Gordon Freeman) would we be having this discussion at all, even if he admitted he were a gay torture fetishist?

I'm quoting this because this is a solid point that I think is very desperately flying under the radar. We'll definitely treat this happening to males far more differently than females - no doubt social imprinting at work.

 

Having wandered into this topic myself, I will say a few things on my mind, especially as I am a creator who would be more than willing to create some things that would make people deeply uncomfortable.

  1. I'm a firm believer in that fantasy is fantasy. Fantasy is powerful and alluring precisely because it lets us do things that we can't do in reality - even if that fantasy is of something gross, disturbing, offensive, whatever.
  2. To me, as long as it's fantasy, anything goes - even if it entails real people, as long as it's kept to fantasy. A creator should be free to create what they want and how they want to make it, without necessarily feeling a need to sanitize it or make it more acceptable unless it's by their own volition and theirs alone.
  3. When you use fantasy to express a desire to do anything in those fantasies to real-life people or things for real, it's time to seek professional mental help immediately. There's a difference between someone who dreams of banging some successful movie star and is content to leave it to their mind, and the one who actually tries to force themselves upon them.
  4. I believe in being ethical and up-front if the fantasy would make people uncomfortable. For example, this would include, but is not limited to, making it clear "These sorts of things are going to exist in this work at some point," and it is then up to the viewer if they wish to continue. If they don't like that it will contain that, they're free to back out; no harm, no foul, and I feel like I'm doing my part as a responsible creator who dabbles in dark, disturbing, and occasionally abhorrent themes in giving them sufficient real-world disclosure and a chance to decide that the work is not for them.
  5. However, if they continue, view the stuff, and THEN get offended, then I call bullshit on that, because you were told in no uncertain terms that the project would have this content, and acknowledged it to proceed into the work proper. At that point, in my mind, you lose any sort of moral outrage grounds to stand on - if you don't like that, say, there was a depiction of rape, but you were warned up front that there would be rape and proceeded anyway, you're a hypocrite, pure and simple. If a SJW wants to get all mad at me for that, then that's exactly what I'd be pointing to - you were warned it'd have it, you acknowledged you were okay with that content, then proceeded just to try to generate outrage when you finally got to it. That's not how it works, sunshine.

Now, having said that... the moderation issue.

 

Frankly, the moderators are free to run the forum as they (and the management) see fit. They own the place; you do not. They decide what speech is allowed on here, and what is not. "But muh free speech" doesn't work here or in any other online forum - this isn't the US Government, or any other government.

 

The expectation is that you play by the rules. If you show content that violates the rules, it gets slapped. That's how things are supposed to work.

 

The smart thing to do, of course, would have been to not show that at all, since it clearly flies in the face of the forum's rules. Spoilertagging it might have been slightly more acceptable, but the content itself was the problem. The ethical way to do it would have been to not show it, but to hint that there might be some disturbing content for those who play it. Simple and clean.

 

In the long run though, if it seems to be a pattern, enough people will remember this guy's works and begin to inform others of it. They'll do the responsible disclosure for him whether he wants that or not; whether he likes that or not is another question entirely. Hopefully he'll learn from that. Nobody is saying he can't put that in his project if that's what he truly wants - but if it might offend people, it's ethical to at least tip off that some things found might be disturbing.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Graf Zahl said:

Why is it that everybody considers the internet a place without rules where they can do as they see fit, screw the laws or just common Human decency?

Yep, beats me, I don't understand it either. As an anecdote, we banned someone right here on Doomworld a couple of weeks ago because they wouldn't stop being aggressive and rude to other posters, and when issued a warning their response was to post a thread saying the equivalent of "better ban me then because I will never change and not tolerate any restrictions on my freedom of speech".

 

I mean at least he was honest and upfront about it I guess, but I was left with so many questions. Is he like this in real life, for example, defying all the rules of polite society by insulting random people he sees in the supermarket? I'm assuming not, but for some reason whenever things take place "on the internet", it's time to put on the cape and stretch underpants and become Free Speech Man, Internet Superhero for Justice.

 

The whole "Internet as unbridled free speech" thing is very much a modern invention, by the way, but it's been retconned into the myth that it was always this way. I date it to maybe 10 years ago when sites like 4chan and Reddit became popular - both have historically been actively hostile to the sheer concept of moderation. But if you go back a bit further to before they rewrote history you'll find that successful discussion forums have always been moderated. Even Usenet had moderated groups, like rec.games.computers.doom, which is where the Doom community discussed things before Doomworld came on the scene.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, fraggle said:

Yep, beats me, I don't understand it either. As an anecdote, we banned someone right here on Doomworld a couple of weeks ago because they wouldn't stop being aggressive and rude to other posters, and when issued a warning their response was to post a thread saying the equivalent of "better ban me then because I will never change and not tolerate any restrictions on my freedom of speech".

Ohh yeah, that guy. Welp, he asked for it, so hopefully he's happy at least. :P

 

5 minutes ago, fraggle said:

I mean at least he was honest and upfront about it I guess, but I was left with so many questions. Is he like this in real life, for example, defying all the rules of polite society by insulting random people he sees in the supermarket?

That's actually the scary part, and it's why frankly I wish this country would reintroduce Civics classes.

 

When you drill "freedom of speech" into kids' heads but then don't clarify exactly what it means and that it DOES still have limits and isn't boundless freedom of speech, stuff like this is exactly what happens.

 

The exact same thing is the case with the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Many people like to say it gives them a right to own a gun. Far fewer apparently remember that it's more specifically about not taking guns away for a very specific reason that literally hasn't existed in this country for about 200 years now.

 

But now we've just all decided it's about "right to own a gun for any reason," just like how freedom of speech is becoming "I can say anything I want, anywhere I want, anytime I want."

 

Even though that law is, like the Second Amendment, more about how the government won't censor what you say on public land, rather than you have the right to say whatever. If you come over to my house and call me fuckface, I've got a right to tell you to not call me that or I'm kicking your ass out of my house. It's private property; the government can't do shit about that unless they're going to take my house by eminent domain.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, dew said:

Have you ever been targeted for your DB membership personally, or are you springing into action on behalf of your ingroup? You're obviously talking about my dig into gaspe, who 1) is very much a part of the outspoken political wing of DB, 2) dug into me with a "you" that implied I'm either hiveminding with Not Jabba, or trying to stir controversy myself by dissecting his own provocative post.

1)Absolutely not. wtf are you on? I don't even talk about politics at all, but what do I know? everything is politics nowdays. I admit that I do like to poke at some of the (imo) stupidity and odd double standards that happens here, and despite this I even defended this place there in some events. For sure I don't agree with many of the politics that is discussed there, I don't even want touch that stuff with a ten foot pole and I guess that's the case for other DB members too. Phobus already articulated well and in a better way that I could do how I feel about this whole thing and 2) about the fact that apparently for you (and others) is totally fine to think of DB as a hivemind and to refer of it as such.

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, fraggle said:

I mean at least he was honest and upfront about it I guess, but I was left with so many questions. Is he like this in real life, for example, defying all the rules of polite society by insulting random people he sees in the supermarket?

 

Having actually run into this issue myself, I would say that actually yes, assholes in general will just be assholes... anywhere, internet or otherwise, especially those who tend to come up with that sort of crap-talk.

 

We have a saying, "how you behave at home is how you behave in society", and for some that's definitely true.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Dark Pulse said:

I'm quoting this because this is a solid point that I think is very desperately flying under the radar. We'll definitely treat this happening to males far more differently than females - no doubt social imprinting at work.

 

Having wandered into this topic myself, I will say a few things on my mind, especially as I am a creator who would be more than willing to create some things that would make people deeply uncomfortable.

 

 

I don't think it would be treated differently if it were a man in the context of men being portrayed as sexually desirable when in captivity and with an accompanying history of suppression, dehumanization, and assumed weakness. Since that is not the context of society, it shouldn't be a surprise that it is never assumed.

 

If it were Gordon Freeman with a demonic dildo up his ass, or with his nuts in a winch or something, then I don't think DW would like that either. But there's a reason you wouldn't assume a guy who is tied up is about to be raped or was already, while you do assume that if it's a girl. And it's not because SJWs have brainwashed you into it. It's because people purposely use this imagery with sexual intent, to be arousing. So the social imprinting you speak of is actually happening in the opposite direction. When you see a bound woman, you assume what's going to happen next, or could happen. If not, congratulations for being ignorant of the artist's intent: you missed the point.

 

Sorry boys, you don't get to play the victim card without anything to back it up. You have to keep saying "if" because the example at hand, and statically the majority of all available examples, are not men.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, fraggle said:

Is he like this in real life, for example, defying all the rules of polite society by insulting random people he sees in the supermarket?

I doubt it, some just like to play the tough guy role hiding behind their fake internet personas, It's not uncommon.

Share this post


Link to post

Hello everyone,

This will be my final post in this thread which has now completely derailed.

 

The purpose of this thread was to raise my concerns regarding the bizarre handling of the thread by the moderation team. I'm sure it has been understood by all posters whom have properly read the initial post, yet it seems the purpose has eluded many. These concerns were adressed by Linguica and the thread has since been set to the standards of moderation expected on Doomworld. 

 

Good day to all

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×