(OLD) Contest Unfair Infractions Here

[Dan]

The fact that you even said it took a lot of "official" emotional strength shows that you clearly are making a joke of how the GKAs try to be super "official". On that front, I agree, people take the GKAs way too seriously and people (including the event staff) try to make it all way too "official". You definitely can't sit there and act like you've never made a joke of the GKAs though, as you've regularly said "oh, no one ever votes for me for the GKAs" when you drop out of them every year. You only do this as a joke, because you know you do get votes, and in fact you've gotten quite a few and before dropping out, were likely to win best signature, and you've been up there for a lot of awards in the past. You were certainly trying to bring home a point about how "official" the GKAs are by using the word "official" as an enhancer for practically every noun in your Life Advice post.

Why did you, this time, wait until the voting was almost over, before dropping out, when in previous years you dropped out immediately? Seems incredibly silly and you wasted a lot of people's time as well as their votes in the initial round which could have gone to someone else. Then you made a big thread about it in Life Advice? I don't want to hear it. Even if it wasn't a troll thread, the fact that you are trying to argue that you weren't using the word official on purpose is ridiculous; you obviously were. And to imply we can actually come to you and expect an honest answer when you know you have dragged out jokes before in the past, even to staff members, is laughable at best.

If you want us to take you seriously, why not try being serious every once in a while?

Because Rep it results in this pathetic situation we are in now. I'm trying to be taken seriously now, but oh gosh I made a joke about the GKA's so that makes me exempt from ever holding a serious conversation around the event? You are being rather horrible towards me with all these fair weather assumptions. I make jokes around everything including situations that I find upsetting which is my own way of dealing with emotional issues. Making a big deal and pouring my heart out isn't something I usually do, I don't know how you can still sit on your all knowing throne and say "you aren't being serious Dan". I hate doing this but I must do it based on the Orange principal.

I know it was wrong for me to allow myself to get into the final round, but I thought I was strong enough this year to deal with the outcome. As that outcome was getting closer and closer I began to realise perhaps I wasn't as strong as I thought, WHICH is why I made a thread in the first place about this issue and explained over there why I had second thoughts and wanted others to chime in about it. There were a couple of healthy posts that allowed me to rethink my postion and that is why I excluded myself yet again. Although you should already know this because I imagine you at least read what you were deleting first.

The problem is Rep you are married to the idea that I can never be serious, and you won't let anything break your marriage with your Ill thought. I can be very serious and people that have held many discussions with me in the past can vouch for that, I thought you were one of those people, so I'm sorry for believing that. The reason I'm not serious about my emotions on the forum is due to it being unnecessary to me and others. Why on mars would some stranger want to read up on someone's life they care little for? We are here to enjoy ourselves.

I didn't use the word official that much and I used it in hopes of making my situation look at little less pathetic. I know it's incredibly sad that someone can hold stress over forum awards but here I am.
So Jamie if you ever one day say something along the lines of "I wonder why that specimen Dan is never serious" print this discussion out and staple it onto your forehead and look in the mirror.

I'll carry on bringing this situation up till you get it through your head that I was completely serious in that thread, might take 100 years to break your stubborn thoughts.

 

[Jamie]

@Dan, I apologize if myself and other staff misinterpreted your intentions in posting the thread, and I moved it back to the forum it was originally posted in. Certainly you can see why we viewed it how we did, and how the use of the word official could have made it seem trollish. That being said, assuming we are wrong and this isn't just you screwing with us, it doesn't excuse us making our assumption and I'm sorry you felt mistreated.

 

[Dan]

I'm glad this issue has been resolved, I must admit I didn't expect it to be so soon. I still think that you should have at least spoken to me first about it, but yes I can see your side of the situation.
As it stands this thread has given me much hope that future issues with the forum can be resolved too in a healthy manner.

 

[Mipha]

Dues(I think) informed me about this thread so I thought I'd post here.
A couple of months ago one of my family members joined and I got infracted for alt acounts. How to I get rid of the warning points?

 

[Lozjam]

I do have something to say. No clear infractions we're given, merely warnings. However, regarding the sociability of this site, and the problems around it. I think we need to talk about this.

My post, did not directly go against ZD rules. I got warned for inappropriate content on the third degree, and I left out of the warning. I am grateful, that no actual points were given. However, the fact that I was not given a real reason by @Vanessa28(I think you're awesome by the way. I know you are just doing your job and I bear no ill will nor hatred against you). However, the post I sent did not break any of ZD's rules. It passes by as something that is not vulgar, as it uses no foul language nor true citations of incenuation.

ZD's rules remark this particular subject in the "Keep it Clean" section, and the specific stating I am assuming I am getting a warning on is the part where it says "sexual orientation". Sexual orientation is a repeating pattern of romantic and sexual inquiries. So, for example, if I had continued on with posting to the same user I did with something akin to "I want you so much" and continually harassed him, then that would certainly be caused as such, making said user uncomfortable which is something that should be infracted.

Likewise, is that the bearer of the joke was aware that it was a joke from the very beginning. It did not make him uncomfortable, because he knew it was a joke(as I clearly worded the post as such, especially a post in a non-vulgar nor sexually oriented way). Since he was the main topic of the joke, and he was in no way out down from my post nor did he feel the need to leave the site, nor the thread. It in no way, shape, or form harmed him in any way, so what exactly is the problem. Within the main site, there is a variety of sexual jokes that involve another member. However, these continue to leave by with no infractions.

Not only that, but a string of posts in the Truth or Dare thread have similar sexual strides, or even that of a greater amount than what I posted:

Alright I pick truth

Who was the last person you fantasized about? (Unable to come up with something good)

Fantasized?

Yeah I meant in a more sexual way, not what, just who. Again I was unable to think of anything clever and came up with this dumb question.

Have another one a better one. Hmmm. What made you join this website?

No I just wondering what fantasizing means...

I was looking for MM guides and then I saw this site and got hooked.

Asking for what, presumably a minor sexually fantasizes about in a main site thread surely is more "inappropriate" and revealing than a single offhand comment. Yet, I was warned, yet he was not. Why?

It is clear that this punishment is merely for the reason of social commentary. Some members got outraged at the thought of a simple little joke towards another user of this thread. The moderators at this site were forced to take action. However, we are still missing the fact that I don't believe that I broke any rules, and the non-infracted posts supports this heavily. There is no amount of wrong here, and I am only being punished because of perceived projection. As another member here has said, @Deus for example. This was merely a simple joke, and it was clear it was just an offhand joke from the very beginning.

If Zelda Dungeon is going to be punishing people for jokes that don't make the recipient of the joke uncomfortable, merely because of social commentary, we do indeed have problems. What's to stop someone from making a "bi-curious" joke, making a statement to it so that moderators have to take action? Is this truly right? Is this against the rules? No. So why should something like this get infracted in the future? What's to stop sly homosexual jokes from being infracted? Or even American/Canadian/Britain jokes where the other side bashes the other for good Ol' jolly fun? Other users down the line could easily take "offense" to these. Do these deserve to be deleted, infracted, and explicitly called out on too?

ZD has one of the best atmospheres of any forum, it's nice, chill, and fun. However, a warning for this says that I cannot merely tell a single joke because of social commentary. As I didn't break the rules, and I didn't harm the recipient of the joke. I feel I am being unfairly punished, yet I do not fear for myself, but for others being unfairly punished for the same reason.

I want to state again that I have no ill will towards our moderating staff. However, this is something that has to be dealt with as we are going towards Zelda Informer, and getting an influx of new members. I am glad I did not get any infraction points, however, we need to address these issues firsthand so that we can go towards the future.

 

[Vanessa28]

The reason why you got the warning was because of what was said to someone who is 12 years old. Your post has been reported several times. At first I wrote just a warning towards you and the others in the thread. But another moderator decided to delete all the posts including my warning. And because of this, people got a bit confused why posts were suddenly deleted. Then we decided to just give you a warning and leave another one in the thread. Does this mean you can't make a joke? No of course not. Does this mean you will get punished for everything or walk on eggshells? Hell no. As many people know, we hardly hand out infractions/warnings. But this was because it was said to a TWELF YEARS OLD. And again, your post got reported several times. So do we have to tell the people who reported it and were offended by it (even if it was meant as a joke) to let it go and not to feel offended? We also have members to listen to. What good will it do to us as a team if we don't even listen to people who do think it went a bit too far? And too often people who say they actually don't care at the moment, say they don't like it afterwards. This has happened so often.
The reason why I decided not to give you an infraction is because I knew it was meant as a joke. Plus in general you're a very decent member and have a good reputation and I didn't want to make it all dramatic and go beserk and be unreasonable. We as a team decided to hand out the warning. Plus you don't know if other members got warned or not. It's not like every time we give a warning, it's going to be made public.

 

[Dio]

. So do we have to tell the people who reported it and were offended by it (even if it was meant as a joke) to let it go and not to feel offended

Its not a valid reason to give a warning because some members got offended. It doesn't concern them. What if someone said they were gay on this site and members reported them and were offended by their homosexuality. Would you then warn the gay member not to say they were gay again?

No rules were broken and I see no reason to give official warnings for non rule breaking.

 

[Vanessa28]

Its not a valid reason to give a warning because some members got offended. It doesn't concern them. What if someone said they were gay on this site and members reported them and were offended by their homosexuality. Would you then warn the gay member not to say they were gay again?

No rules were broken and I see no reason to give official warnings for non rule breaking.

Are you serious?? To use an example for someone's sexuality is something completely different than making a joke towards a twelf years old about banging them. People forget this is still a family site. And this joke went a bit too far. So you are saying we shouldn't listen to other members and say "screw you dudes, grow up" ? There are differences. Does this mean nobody can make a joke anymore? Or everybody will get punished for everything said? No of course not. You know very well the moderating team has been very laidback lately. There are hardly any rules broken. And Lozjam is still a decent member in my books. But the team decided something had to at least be said about the situation.
Does this mean we have to punish everybody who gets reported? You don't wanna know how often we get very ridiculous reports even for things said a long time ago. We do look at the reports and talk about it with the staff team and I can assure you we don't punish people mainly because of reports. if that was the case, this site would be completely dead by now.

 

[Dio]

Are you serious?? To use an example for someone's sexuality is something completely different than making a joke towards a twelf years old about banging them. People forget this is still a family site. And this joke went a bit too far. So you are saying we shouldn't listen to other members and say "screw you dudes, grow up" ? There are differences. Does this mean nobody can make a joke anymore? Or everybody will get punished for everything said? No of course not. You know very well the moderating team has been very laidback lately. There are hardly any rules broken. And Lozjam is still a decent member in my books. But the team decided something had to at least be said about the situation.
Does this mean we have to punish everybody who gets reported? You don't wanna know how often we get very ridiculous reports even for things said a long time ago. We do look at the reports and talk about it with the staff team and I can assure you we don't punish people mainly because of reports. if that was the case, this site would be completely dead by now.

Its not completely different. People are free to be homosexual and free to make jokes to 12 year olds. However in this case because some members got offended making a joke to a 12 year old is an offense that requires a warning.

Just as if people had reported a homosexual for being gay you need to explain that it doesnt concern them if someone is gay or not just as in this case where the recipient of the joke was not feeling bullied by the joke and therefore it does not concern the complainers.

 

[Lozjam]

Its not a valid reason to give a warning because some members got offended. It doesn't concern them. What if someone said they were gay on this site and members reported them and were offended by their homosexuality. Would you then warn the gay member not to say they were gay again?

No rules were broken and I see no reason to give official warnings for non rule breaking.

Exactly this.
Like I said Vanessa, I am extremely grateful that I only got a warning. I merely want to bring this issue up for the futures sake. I also think it's great you think I'm a good poster, and used said reputation to protect me. However, it is of the greater issue at hand. Not for my own sake, but for others.

What if I was offended by Deus bashing Skyward Sword and such? It's not against the rules to bash Skyward Sword. But it could still offend me? Does that mean that you have to punish Deus?

Or a more relevant issue. What if I was offended by Dan bashing my country? Saying how better Britain is then America and by extension Americans. What if I take offense to that as well? Does that mean that Dan should be punished?

Or even this. I was very legitimately offended when people started calling me a pedophile within the Shoutbox. Yeah. For a single joke that was taken out of proportion. Yet nothing was even done there, despite it being outright offensive.

However "Socially wrong" these things may be. These technically do not break the rules.

Veronica, like I said, within the specifications of these rules
http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/threads/zelda-dungeon-forum-rules.50340/

Nothing within the rules was broken. There is a certain level of moderation interpretation, however, nothing was indeed broken. No matter how "socially unacceptable" it may be, it still doesn't break the rules. If we have to take a new look at additional rules and clarifications for our merge to ZI. Then great. However, as it currently stands, I don't believe that any of these rules have been violated, no much more so than members have been doing and currently doing.

 

[Vanessa28]

I'm actually surprised you two are making a huge deal out of this and are okay with this being said to a twelve years old. And no Deus it's not the same. But we will never agree about this so I leave it there.

If you wanna know if it broke a rule or not, take a look at this rule (written in the same post you quoted Lozjam )
Keep It Clean: We want this to be an open and welcoming environment for people of all ages, nationalities, and beliefs. This can easily be accomplished by "keeping it clean" and having little to no cursing or foul language within posts. There is a word filter in place, and bypassing it is not allowed. Members shall also refrain from posting any messages, images, or other media that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented (except in appropriate Mature Discussions), hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws (including piracy, e.g. ROMs, warez). (Infraction: 3 (language), 6 (other), or 20 (extreme) points)

I stand by my decision and say it was the right thing to do. Feel free to take this up to @Jimmy.F27 when he returns (which should be by tomorrow).

 

[Soul]

If anything, the rules should probably be updated. I can see the argument on both sides, really, but when it comes down to it, whatever was said was probably not okay to say to a 12 year old, even if it was a joke. Since Lozjam didn't get any warning points anyway, I don't see a problem in this case specifically, but it's a good idea to look at it a little closer to make sure the case is clear if anything like this happens in the future again.

 

[Vanessa28]

I actually just warned Lozjam in the thread itself and told him to be more careful in the future. But another mod deleted all posts related to Lozjam's post including mine. It made no sense to create a warning meant towards lozjam in the thread without the post being there. This is why we decided to just give him a warning because some mods felt something needed to be said about this and to be more careful in the future. But when you hand out a warning, you'll have to select a reason for the warning. And in this case the reason given was the only option I could use. But this means in no way they can't make jokes anymore and will be punished in the future for everything being said. This is not the case and Lozjam has no reasons to be afraid to say anything.

 

[Ronin]

For the record, I didn't report anything.

Its not a valid reason to give a warning because some members got offended. It doesn't concern them. What if someone said they were gay on this site and members reported them and were offended by their homosexuality. Would you then warn the gay member not to say they were gay again?

No rules were broken and I see no reason to give official warnings for non rule breaking.

Let's get one thing straight: There's a clear line between being offended and being offensive. If a handful of members finds something distasteful, then they have every right to object; it does concern them because they're part of the same userbase. Even a joke made in poor taste (generally speaking) won't be agreeable to everyone, and at that point it can hardly be called a joke (@Lozjam still respect ya, bro). Also, Deus, I can hardly see how your analogy pertains to this. Why isn't it specified whether said gay member is joking or not? The contexts of the analogy and the one at hand don't really align, you dig?

Warnings like this are given out so that violations don't escalate. Otherwise, any member could say whatever they wanted and get away with it, without consequence. That type of environment, no matter how tantalizing "free speech" is, isn't a welcoming one.

 

[Lozjam]

I'm actually surprised you two are making a huge deal out of this and are okay with this being said to a twelve years old. And no Deus it's not the same. But we will never agree about this so I leave it there.

If you wanna know if it broke a rule or not, take a look at this rule (written in the same post you quoted Lozjam )
Keep It Clean: We want this to be an open and welcoming environment for people of all ages, nationalities, and beliefs. This can easily be accomplished by "keeping it clean" and having little to no cursing or foul language within posts. There is a word filter in place, and bypassing it is not allowed. Members shall also refrain from posting any messages, images, or other media that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented (except in appropriate Mature Discussions), hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws (including piracy, e.g. ROMs, warez). (Infraction: 3 (language), 6 (other), or 20 (extreme) points)

I stand by my decision and say it was the right thing to do. Feel free to take this up to @Jimmy.F27 when he returns (which should be by tomorrow).

The rules there make no distinction of age, and what I said was of similar caliber of what other posters have done and are currently doing. Technically speaking as well, 12 years do not exist within this forum. You must be at least 13 years of age in order to join this forum.

Furthermore, there is no true breaking of the rules as well. As it isn't vulgar, threatening, hateful, violative of any laws, nor sexually-oriented, as I have proven in a prior post.

If anything, the rules should probably be updated. I can see the argument on both sides, really, but when it comes down to it, whatever was said was probably not okay to say to a 12 year old, even if it was a joke. Since Lozjam didn't get any warning points anyway, I don't see a problem in this case specifically, but it's a good idea to look at it a little closer to make sure the case is clear if anything like this happens in the future again.

Like I have said, this isn't really problem with my case specifically. However we need to provide a clear distinction of what is in the rules, and what isn't, so that moderators in the future within the merge cannot unjustly punish other members. Revisiting the rules in the future is a good idea. However, there was no rule truly broken within my case, so that if this were to be an infraction, it would be unjustified.