New rules

[Madjhatter]

I just snorted my iced tea while reading the last 5 posts, thanks guys.  :lol:

I got a short story for you. Last year on another forum a girl was making inappropriate posts describing what she'd do with a frontman's girlfriend (a model) who she thought was hot. She was asked several times (once by me) not to post them in the public part of the forum, instead to post them in the private part of the forum. You know what happened? We all got bitched out by other members saying "1st fucking amendment" and "Freedom of Speech".  I find it kind of funny and I do realize that all forums are different but for some reason, I dont think that taking shots at JRR or describing something as 'multi orgasmic death sex' is worse than a then 16 year old girl describing her lesbian fantasy with a model, in alot of detail.  Then getting told to basically put up with it while here we can't say that there might be something iffy about JRR/einsof or saying stuff about it or anything else that is considered 'inapproriate'. (which, come on, isn't even that bad)

[SarahAlex]

To Madjhatter: Don't worry, we (MistcastDice and I) are not going to describe our sexual fantasies that include Hollywood or someone else and any possible threesomes also won't be discusssed here. :lol: :lol: :lol:

But you're right, the standards are extremely different when you compare more boards.

[Madjhatter]

^ I actually ended up not caring in the end about that then. I wouldn't care what you guys posted.

[nage]

To Madjhatter: Don't worry, we (MistcastDice and I) are not going to describe our sexual fantasies that include Hollywood or someone else and any possible threesomes also won't be discusssed here.

  NOW this thread started to be interesting.......

[Hollywood]

For the record, I still await answers to both this and this.

Still waiting, Hypno.  I understand you're busy, but it's been several days now.

[MiscastDice]

To Madjhatter: Don't worry, we (MistcastDice and I) are not going to describe our sexual fantasies that include Hollywood or someone else and any possible threesomes also won't be discusssed here. :lol: :lol: :lol:

But you're right, the standards are extremely different when you compare more boards.

 :twisted: Sounds very hot.

And the standards are different. I hate the "well at least we aren't as strict as JRR" because JRR is THE strictest and most controlled, mod-worshipping environment in even Jrock and visual kei forums. Batsu and JPOPMusic are much less strict (and IMO need a little more strictness in regard to personal attacks between members: say the wrong thing and you find yourself the victim of a hate machine) so the idea that these rules are the best of jrock fora? NO.

[Sander]

For the record, I still await answers to both this and this.

Still waiting, Hypno.  I understand you're busy, but it's been several days now.

Yeah, I'v been buisy for several days now. Which is one of the reasons I'm not answering now, maybe tomorrow, after I have slept as long as I want for the first time in last 2-3 weeks.

[Matilda in Oz]

Since this is the suggestions part of the forum, I'm going to make a suggestion.

First of all, I'm not trying to take away from previous discussions, but I just don't want to get involved in those discussions at present (and also because I don't know all the history behind it). I have a different idea, as follows:

This is a global forum and correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't a lot of the bickering and arguing maybe be avoided if we understood our cultural sensibilities a bit better? If we could bring it up a level, from the personal to the more general?

Being a smart bunch of people, I'm certain everyone is already trying to do this, but how about adding - in the spirit of increased peace and understanding and also a sense of humour - a guideline to the rules (not another rule, just a guideline) saying something along the line of "please try and consider cultural differences in your manner of speaking to each other".

In addition to this guideline, I suggest there be a thread (with a link to it in the guideline) where everyone can describe, beyond the basics of being polite,  what behaviour, way of conducting a discussion, or anything else that can cause upset, from their particular culture's point of view.

For example:

Some cultures may find it annoying when people chatter away without much substance and expect thought and research before posting. Other cultures may find that too rigid and think it's nice to just throw ideas around.

Or

Some cultures may find it offensive when given what they see as direct orders, while others may think it's perfectly acceptable to ask people to do this or do that without having to add a hundred pleases and thankyous.

Or

In some cultures it's more or less expected that you interrupt others. It makes you seem more vivid and interesting, while in other cultures interrupting is perceived as terribly rude and it's expected that each person gets to finish what they are saying before the next person starts talking.

Etc etc etc. The differences are almost endless.

What do you think? Could this solution serve to take some of the pressure off? And perhaps add some fun to the forum as an additional bonus? It would of course involve a certain amount of generalising, which in itself may offend someone, but I don't know how to get around that one. Perhaps add a disclaimer at the beginning of the thread to that effect.

[Sander]

Well, it's all pretty in text, but think. Wouldn't "cultural understanding" also mean that I don't get offended when people do things that I usually would find offensive? As I should know that he might not know the traditions of my culture? Which would make all other discussion... Pointless...


Just my opinion tho

[SarahAlex]

To Matilda in Oz: I think it's not only about nationalities, it's about different people. In this globalized world it almost doesn't matter if you are an American, European, Asiatic, Australian or African - at least when you consider people who has the internet connection. :wink: This is "a battle" of different character types, not countries.
But I agree with you in all points, I only use different terminology.

[ferret]

While I agree, nationality can have to do with someone's behaviour on the internet. Just remember the "Japanese rockers in Nazi uniform" debate (well, it was a little one, but still). Numerous Germans (and me   ) were rather offended/didn't like it/thought it was annoying.

[Hollywood]

Well, it's all pretty in text, but think. Wouldn't "cultural understanding" also mean that I don't get offended when people do things that I usually would find offensive? As I should know that he might not know the traditions of my culture? Which would make all other discussion... Pointless...


Just my opinion tho

Hypno!  We agree about something! :mrgreen:

Yeah, I also don't think what Matilda described would help much-- especially since when it comes to the arguments on this thread, it's not like it's Nationality A vs. Nationality B, there are people from many different cultures on both "sides" of the issue.

And I think the "location" part of one's profile, which is displayed whenever you post if you choose to fill it out, is a good enough "disclaimer" that the user is from whatever country anyway.

I also think it's dangerous to assume too much based simply on someone's country or culture.  Not all individuals from a culture behave the same way.  For example, Amethyst_Dahlia and I are both from the US and seem to have completely different personalities.  While on the other hand, the three main posters in the DTR forum are a guy from Brazil, a girl from Germany, and a guy from the US-- and not only do we get along well, but we all use the same kind of language when speaking to each other, have nearly the exact same musical taste, and agree about practically everything.

[SarahAlex]

Hypno!  We agree about something! :mrgreen:

Omg, let's celebrate! :lol:

Somebody should write Hypno/Hollywood "fan"fiction.

[VioletCamicat]

I think the nationality/cultural origin is just one of many, many things which makes a person behave like this and that. I wouldn't say that I'd refuse to pay attention to that little point completely, but... yeah, it's just one out of many points which are forming everyone's personality. I mean, it couldn't be used as excuse or as main reason for behaviour.
Every country has its sweethearts, its assholes and its shy people. Personality types aren't ordered in countries.

But I think it's good that it was pointed out, since it's eventually can explain some difficulties. I just think it isn't so necessary to make a special guideline and value too much on that. Honestly I was thinking, that people here consider that now and then anyway.

[Matilda in Oz]

Please note that in my previous comment I made no mention of "country" or "nationality" in reference to culture. Any country can contain any number of various types of cultures. It's a word with a really broad definition. I should have added a link to the definition of culture in my previous comment, but here it is. It's too much text to cut and paste, so Wikipedia's will do reasonably nicely.

Oh Hypno, I would like to say that you have no idea how much I wish you had not asked this:

Well, it's all pretty in text, but think. Wouldn't "cultural understanding" also mean that I don't get offended when people do things that I usually would find offensive? As I should know that he might not know the traditions of my culture? Which would make all other discussion... Pointless...


Just my opinion tho

Your leap in logic between "cultural understanding" and "all discussions become pointless" is massive, and has me baffled as it is, but to make this jump using the stepping stone of - in so many words - that "if we get to know a person's background, we have to understand their bad behaviour and are not allowed to react"......

 :shock:

[Matilda in Oz]

:roll:  Drats, I wanted to reply to everyone's post, but you are all talking about countries and nationalities, which I was NOT. Funny how something can be read into one's post that's not even there..... Ah, well. :?

[Matilda in Oz]

But I think it's good that it was pointed out, since it's eventually can explain some difficulties. I just think it isn't so necessary to make a special guideline and value too much on that. Honestly I was thinking, that people here consider that now and then anyway.

Thanks. And you are right. I think most people try their utmost to be considerate MOST of the time  :wink: , so maybe a guidline isn't necessary. I even think some of the rules can be scrapped but that's beside this point.

I have always believed, though, that the more people know about each other's background, culture, childhood, upbringing, interests and hobbies and etc etc, the higher the chance that they get along. In other words, the more you understand someone else, the more tolerant of that person you become. Perhaps we should add more cosplay and hobby threads instead, Lol?

[Hollywood]

I even think some of the rules can be scrapped but that's beside this point.

How is that beside the point?  This is a thread for comments and discussion about the rules.

I have always believed, though, that the more people know about each other's background, culture, childhood, upbringing, interests and hobbies and etc etc, the higher the chance that they get along. In other words, the more you understand someone else, the more tolerant of that person you become.

If an admin is unable to properly perform her administrative duties, why she is unable to do so is irrelevant.  She is still an unfit admin.  If a cop continually arrested citizens with absolutely no legal basis for the arrests, do you think the citizens would care about his childhood and hobbies, or would they simply want a cop who can properly and unabusively carry out his job?

By the way, Hypno, I'm going to ask you yet again to please answer my questions.  Your "I'm busy" excuse is beginning to wear out, given that you are obviously not "too busy" to post elsewhere in the forum, or even to reply to others' posts on this very thread.

Originally posted on June 5th:
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2052&start=179

OK, since Hypno said it's still OK to point stuff out:

Right now (without the new rules), PN is allowed to do as she will as long as I'm ok with it. And you are by all means allowed to point out where she has done so.

I'd like to point out what happened to the first post of this thread.  I just now noticed this:

The post made here originally has been deleted because it was incomplete and distorted. Full information, possibly a complete translation, about the press conference, will become available on Jrock Revolution from the JRR representative who attended the press conference. A link where to find that will be posted as soon as it becomes available.

I don't know who made this edit or when-- while it matches PN's writing style, to be fair it's not signed or dated.  I don't remember now what was in the original post, but regardless, here again is that JRR connection.  Even if it was just a rumor, I thought rumors were allowed to be posted here?

I'm confused.  This post was deleted because the information in it had not been confirmed by JRR?  Is approval from a JRR representative really needed before posting information on X Freaks? :?

Originally posted on June 10th:
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2447&start=37

I said:

2. Please make constructive posts. A certain amount of good natured off topic is ok, but negative and bantering comments without facts to back them up and direct offenses are not allowed. Constructive criticism is welcomed. This rule is not enforced as harshly in the Offtopic section of the board.

This, combined with the lack of rules about what will be done to bad mods/admins, presents an absolutely fantastic loophole for capricious staff members to do as they will.

You said:

Don't be stupid, you know what I mean.

When you ask me to not be stupid, shall I interpet that as "good natured off topic" or as "contructive criticism"?

It's constructive criticism.

Thank you sir, you prove my point.  I understand that from now on I will also be allowed to call other users "stupid"?

It's not a double standard. Downloads are not allowed, YM messages are not allowed.

Earlier on the thread:

Rules #10 and #11 present an incredibly strange double-standard.

Umm yeah, combine rule #12 and you have a triple standard?

You already said it was a double-standard.  If you want your rules and the intention behind them to seem credible to users, I constructively, good-naturedly, usefully and helpfully suggest that you make up your mind before contradicting yourself more than necessary.
I still have not received an answer as to why illegal activity 1 (posting Yoshiki's YM messages) is restricted but illegal activity 2 (sharing Yoshiki's copyrighted music) is allowed and encouraged.

As for the photo disclaimer issue, your own rule 13 invalidates any need for photo disclaimers:

13. Board members are solely responsible for the content of their post. The board owner, administrators and moderators accept no responsibility for any kind of offensive or illegal posts.

If board members are solely responsible for the legality of their posts, what are the photo disclaimers for?  I understand that you are having difficulty managing your forum, and that in times like these it is probably some measure of comfort to exercise your power as an admin in arbitrary and highly visible ways, such as asking forum members to needlessly jump through hoops and include this and that in their posts.  Unfortunately, it does not actually help anyone or benefit the forum (if you were concerned legally about this issue and wanted to help, you could post an image disclaimer for the whole forum, just like this disclaimer you posted in rule 13).  It comes across as petty and gives the impression of a struggling administration losing control over its forum.

Most of the rules were here already in an unwritten form (thanks to my lazyness).

Rules "in an unwritten form" are not rules.  These are new rules, they were not "here already".  Some of them are PN's spontaneously-invented new rules; I suppose their inclusion now as actual rules might be intended as some kind of retroactive claim that PN was enforcing the rules all along (she wasn't).

So, one more inappropriate edit/deletion as she's de-adminned?  Sounds fair, I can live with that.

The 'list' Hollywood managed to put together was 30 people, who had even the slightest complaint about PN, mostly neutral people; against 10 people, who were clearly on PNs side. I wouldn't call that 'everyone'.

Can you think of any other mod or admin that 31 people-- a very high percentage of the active members here-- have "even the slightest complaint" about?

[Matilda in Oz]

I even think some of the rules can be scrapped but that's beside this point.

How is that beside the point?  This is a thread for comments and discussion about the rules.

It certainly is. But if you re-read my words I didn't say "the" point, I said "this" point, indicating that I wanted to focus on my suggestion of increased cultural understanding and not the thrown-in-as-extra opinion of scrapping some of the rules. In other words making clear that the inserted opinion about other rules should be treated as an aside and by implication maybe be brought up again for discussion at a later point. (For you who are less familiar with the English language, an "aside" is a term commonly used in business communication, meaning "outside of this discussion").

I have always believed, though, that the more people know about each other's background, culture, childhood, upbringing, interests and hobbies and etc etc, the higher the chance that they get along. In other words, the more you understand someone else, the more tolerant of that person you become.

If an admin is unable to properly perform her administrative duties, why she is unable to do so is irrelevant.  She is still an unfit admin.  If a cop continually arrested citizens with absolutely no legal basis for the arrests, do you think the citizens would care about his childhood and hobbies, or would they simply want a cop who can properly and unabusively carry out his job?

Treating your observations here as separate entities from my cultural understanding reasoning, I absolutely agree with what you are saying. Yep, I fully agree with your statement about admins. Couldn't agree more. As for the question about police officers, my answer is that of course! The citizens don't give a hoot about a cop's personal upbringing or hobbies when they are on duty, and they shouldn't have to. Officers of the law should follow the law, and that's all there's to it. You have my support on that one too.

But how exactly did you manage to link this in with my suggestion of benefits from increased cultural understanding? Nowhere in my suggestion did I mention unfit admins or cops. I was talking about people in general, members and users of this forum in general.

Let's have a look at how you may have arrived at your conclusions.

A: People's tolerance of other people is heightened if cultural understanding is increased. (my suggestion)

B: Unfit admins and police officers are also people. (can't argue there)

C: Unfit admins and scummy police officers will use cultural understanding as an excuse to be assholes. (ehhh?)

Nah, this logical deduction ends up as a fallacy in my opinion. In the field of logical argumentation it's referred to as "Reductio ad Absurdum".

"Reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to the absurd"), also known as an apagogical argument, reductio ad impossibile, or proof by contradiction, is a type of logical argument where one assumes a claim for the sake of argument and derives an absurd or ridiculous outcome, and then concludes that the original claim must have been wrong as it led to an absurd result." Source: Wikipedia

In the field of my mother's homemade psychology it's referred to as "no lunch for you unless you wash your hands and spit out that chewing gum". I promise I'll never use that treatment as an excuse to make unfair decisions should I ever become a forum administrator or police officer.

[SarahAlex]

D: New rules were introduced because they should solve the complaints about PanthereNoire - so, this subject is still behind the conversation here. Or at least for some of us.
Which means that if somebody writes:

I have always believed, though, that the more people know about each other's background, culture, childhood, upbringing, interests and hobbies and etc etc, the higher the chance that they get along. In other words, the more you understand someone else, the more tolerant of that person you become.

there may be people who read it as "We should know more about background, culture, childhood... etc. of each admin and then we will get along." (=> "we won't mind restrictions, censorship and so on")

Maybe I'm completely wrong but this is how I would "manage to link this in with your suggestion of benefits from increased cultural understanding."

[Hollywood]

But how exactly did you manage to link this in with my suggestion of benefits from increased cultural understanding? Nowhere in my suggestion did I mention unfit admins or cops. I was talking about people in general, members and users of this forum in general.

Basically as SarahAlex said: since you were posting your suggestions on this thread, I assumed that they were on-topic-- i.e., that you were talking about either the new rules themselves, or (by extension) the problems associated with PN's adminship, which are the supposed cause for the implementation of the new rules.

If your suggestions are not related to those topics, maybe it would cause less confusion to post them on a different thread?

[X-J]

Being a smart bunch of people, I'm certain everyone is already trying to do this, but how about adding - in the spirit of increased peace and understanding and also a sense of humour - a guideline to the rules (not another rule, just a guideline) saying something along the line of "please try and consider cultural differences in your manner of speaking to each other".

As a researcher into cultures, I think this is a valid point.

In this globalized world it almost doesn't matter if you are an American, European, Asiatic, Australian or African - at least when you consider people who has the internet connection. Wink This is "a battle" of different character types, not countries.

Actually, the ways people both represent the content (stylistics, rhetoric etc.) of their message and interpret the message in question varies from country to country although the form (grammar, some phraseology) may be identical. This is even true across history: Geo. Washington was thinking of very different "freedom" in comparison to G. W. Bush for instance.  

I also think it's dangerous to assume too much based simply on someone's country or culture. Not all individuals from a culture behave the same way. For example, Amethyst_Dahlia and I are both from the US and seem to have completely different personalities.

This is true also; people are not "just" duped into accepting the "master narratives" of their country but have also their say on the matter. Certain groups may think that a culture determines a person, but this is not the case, it is commonly thought today. Culture does necessarily influence you, i.e. it is impossible to completely wash yourself away from your "native" background and concepts you use to bring order to the world, but you are not enslaved by it, esp. if you're a critical person. To be sure, since Marcuse and Adorno it has been realized that it has become increasingly difficult to break away from all frameworks of "Western" (esp. Anglo-American) culture based on natural law, capital, entertainment and reason.

[Matilda in Oz]

there may be people who read it as "We should know more about background, culture, childhood... etc. of each admin and then we will get along." (=> "we won't mind restrictions, censorship and so on")

That's a good a point!   :?  It's a dilemma!

Everyone draws their own conclusions when reading a text. Some people did indeed draw the conclusions you give as an example there when reading my post. But those conclusions aren't mine, they belong to the person who arrived at them. IMPO I find them extreme and bizarre (not meaning to offend now, I really do find them bizarre), but that's not saying that the conclusions are wrong. They are not wrong, they just aren't mine, and not part of my intention either.

All one can do when this happens is to say that "it was not my intention for you to come to those conclusions".

One person cannot be made responsible for the conclusions of another person. At the very best one can hope that by adding disclaimers such as "it was not my intention for you to come those conclusions", that then that person would try and re-think and think that "ah, maybe that's not what she meant by her text". But you can't make people do that if they don't want to.  :roll:

[Matilda in Oz]

since you were posting your suggestions on this thread, I assumed that they were on-topic-- i.e., that you were talking about either the new rules themselves, or (by extension) the problems associated with PN's adminship, which are the supposed cause for the implementation of the new rules.

If your suggestions are not related to those topics, maybe it would cause less confusion to post them on a different thread?

What you refer to as "on-topic" I would rather call "on-option", since from what I understand, the topic is "Suggestions and discussions about the New Rules".

The first part of your assumption is correct. Yes, my post was right on topic, because I made a suggestion of an addition to the New Rules. If I posted that suggestion anywhere else but in the "suggestions and discussions about the New Rules" it wouldn't make sense, would it?

The second part of your assumption is incorret IMO as it lacks a third option.

Option 1. (your option). Talk about the rules themselves.

Answer: No, I wasn't talking about the new rules themselves, but rather an addition to them.

Option 2. ... or (by extension) the problems associated with PN's adminship, which are the supposed cause for the implementation of the new rules.

Answer: No, I wasn't talking about this either, but let's stop here for a minute anyway.

I never interpreted this thread as an encouragement  to weave all our discussions and suggestions around the problem (now an defunct problem?) with PN. I thought the main focus was the New Rules, which by the way don't say anything about the reason they were created, not with a single word. This means that if one is to know that supposed fact, one has to have read other threads, not an easy thing to do because some of them have been removed.  In other words, the New Rules only reads "New Rules" and then goes on to list the rules. So we discuss the rules, not the history.

To sum that up in three words, I would personally call it "to move on" because I think we should consider the future of the board. The distant future and not just the near future. PN may come or go, stay or leave or whatever, but in the end the board is going to be left with the new rules, and new members will have no clue as to what initially caused those rules to be implemented. And quite possibly not be interested in why either, unless they are board history fans.

Option 3. (my added option) Add something to the rules. (I'm assuming it is allowed to suggest additions)

Answer: Yes! You can safely assume that I'm suggesting an addition. It should be quite clear from reading my post, as I'm suggesting that "how about adding a guideline to the rules".

how about adding - in the spirit of increased peace and understanding and also a sense of humour - a guideline to the rules (not another rule, just a guideline)

And now it's time for:

1. coffee
2. bowl of icecream
3. more coffee

[SarahAlex]

Wow, maybe it's just because I spent 6 hours in the train today but I had to read your posts twice before I finally realized what it was about.

Being a smart bunch of people, I'm certain everyone is already trying to do this, but how about adding - in the spirit of increased peace and understanding and also a sense of humour - a guideline to the rules (not another rule, just a guideline) saying something along the line of "please try and consider cultural differences in your manner of speaking to each other".

Yes, that's very nice and true and everyone should act in compliance with it but as you said, it's only "guideline to the rules". So, is it really necessary to point it out? I mean - this should be the matter of course that people respect the culture of others and that they are aware of the differences. It should apply to the whole world, not only this forum. (Kill my idealistic self, please. Now.) And in that case, do we really need to consider it as something that must be written?

To sum that up in three words, I would personally call it "to move on" because I think we should consider the future of the board. The distant future and not just the near future. PN may come or go, stay or leave or whatever, but in the end the board is going to be left with the new rules, and new members will have no clue as to what initially caused those rules to be implemented. And quite possibly not be interested in why either, unless they are board history fans.

Definitely, but now it's still "the present" because we all know what is behind these new rules. Though time will surely wash it away, some of us haven't moved on yet. You can say that it's wrong, pathetic, rebellious or whatsoever but that's just the way how it is.

[Hollywood]

Yeah, I had to read that multiple times too before I figured it out. Well, given that we already have this rule (which is a good one):

1. Respect the other users, the moderators and the administrators. Personal offences are not tolerated. Also, don’t go out of your way to find something to be offended over. If you think you are being harassed or stalked by another member in any way, contact one of the administrators.

I really don't see any point at all in adding a "notice that people are from different cultures and have different hobbies" (?) rule in addition to that.

About the fact that people are still talking about the new rules and PN and the relationship between the two, some of this can (and should) be attributed to the fact that Hypno and PN are currently refusing to so much as answer users' questions about the rules and their behavior in regard to them.  There are questions I've asked two weeks ago, with polite reminders every several days after, and have still not received answers to.  It's basically impossible to settle a controversial situation like this when one side completely refuses to communicate (and on a public forum no less, where communication is supposedly the whole point).

[Zwanster]

I'm impressed this is still going on  :lol:

Viva La Revolution!
(or something)

[SarahAlex]

Viva La Revolution!
(or something)

Liberté, egalité, fraternité: freedom, equality and brotherhood!
(motto of French revolution)

:wink:

[darkcat21]

the people united will never be defeated  

[Matilda in Oz]

SarahAlex & Hollywood,

I definitely agree that it should be obvious that people should be more understanding of each other! Sadly that's not always the case though, but yeah.... maybe it's overkill to add it to the rules.  :?  ...There's no word from admins on this suggestion yet, so we are left to talk amongst ourselves here. I suppose I'll take their silence for a no, then. (BTW I'm still having a hard time figuring out who's admin or not. There's supposedly a colour scheme to indicate this, but how?).

Hollowood, I fully sympathise with your frustration over not getting any responses. I have read your most recent posts and your questions are valid questions as far as I'm concerned despite me having huge gaps in board history knowledge (which is a reason for choosing "to move on"). So yes, to get the dreaded silence treatment is always far far worse than being told things you don't like to hear. The silence puzzles me too!

And *lol... what's with the Puppetistas popping up here and there? (Zwanster, Darkcat)