Toribash
Maya: there is a lot of diversity among Jews. Ashkenazi Jews are themselves not one group, but a subdivision including people of Polish, Ukrainian, German, Hungarian descent, and more that I can't remember at the moment. Are you arguing that Polish people are Hungarian?
That's not to mention including all the Asian and African Jewish people who have been Jews for centuries.
Why is this important? Because anti-Semitism doesn't refer to just the "Semitic" people (who don't really exist outside of Jewish belief in being people descended from Noah), but refers to a wide swathe of people from around the world with a great many genetic divisions. By your definition, anti-Semitism isn't racist. But it is. Anti-Semitism is racist Maya. Stop being so racist.

Why is the word 'queerphobia' good? Because its root are words that already exist, it covers a wide range of groups pertaining to sexuality and gender, like the word 'racism' covers a wide range of groups pertaining to ethnicity and race. It's just how the English language works, kiddo. If you want to try and invent a new noun for people who specifically are religious persecutors, and are somehow not racist. Well, I wish you bad luck, because it allows racist to claim they're not racist. Not sure how you don't understand that yet, maybe it's because you can't handle being wrong. Or you're racist?
Oh and you spelled it "antisemetic". One i. The rest is stylistic, but I thought it was pretty funny you still didn't notice that. Wilful ignorance is interesting. Anyway, I'm done trying to point out how racist you're being.
Maya is such a bigot.
Originally Posted by sir View Post
Not personally in favor of going ultra specific with these words because then it gives more space for people to fight over semantics. Changing wording doesn't affect how cases are dealt with (e.g. we don't turn down reports that contain transphobic language because rules only contain the word "homophobic") , but allows shitters to try to weasel their way out with complaints such as "but you specified this and this and what I did wasn't listed in the rules so I lift my ban stupid staff".

This is exactly what I was saying but apparently I had to be an asshole about it. I just don't like bigots, what can I say.
You truly are lucky. Never seeing skizzify or Swaves acting like pricks does, indeed, require an insane amount of luck.
However, judging by your posts in this thread (that aren't significantly better than those of hipotibor), I'll allow myself to assume that you might be one of those people who act in a similar way to others, which would give a perfect explanation of why you never noticed users mentioned above spitting racial slurs and/or continuously being toxic over their whole stay in this community.

I haven't been on forum outside of fl0wboard for most of my time with tb, so my interaction with them is almost strictly in-game. I've never seen them be toxic and they've always treated me nicely, guess I am lucky. And no, I don't go around using slurs in-game.

I'm arguing against racist logic, not sure why you think that makes me like a guy who's clearly an awful racist. There's almost no reason to point out his racism, it's so obvious. It would be like calling wounder toxic. What's the point in that??
Maya's racism isn't obvious. At first I didn't think it was intentional.
Assume what you like, my actions are my actions and I seriously doubt staff see genuine reports about me ingame. I'm sure I've had disingenuous reports, but nothing's happened and it's probably because staff understood context.
You'll be pleased to know that as soon as I'm home again in March I'll be mostly in-game and way less on-forum.
SMH DIVINE HOW DARE YOU REPLY IN A THREAD WHERE I, THE MIGHTY GOD OF DISCUSSION, REQUESTED THE PRESENCE OF SIR.

You mean Chirs? Only god I'm aware of atm.
Let's try to actually discuss how toxicity should be addressed in the community and not make bring in politics or some personal hate (looking at you drgonz).

Sure: as long as staff aren't policing based on specific words, but the context of things (is this person really being harassed, or did they bait) I'm happy. Once Divine posted his stats, which I genuinely found very surprising, I was satisfied.
I definitely over reacted initially to that news, I can admit when I was in the wrong. I think already did? But maybe not. That was wrong of me. REEEEEEEEE

I just don't think hating Maya is wrong, and in fact I think she is toxic, but not report-ably toxic - just "hey stop being a [insert latest thing here]" toxic.
Originally Posted by sir View Post
Sales happen, prices change. There have been some wrong decisions regarding pricing in past, yes. Sales, however, will continue to happen - no matter how rare the item is among marketers - thus no response to the thread.

Then say that in the thread. That's all you had to do. Don't ignore people who've been bumping that thread for months and months. The very least you could do is address their concerns and give them a response. Or do you honestly think that's too much work?
Originally Posted by sir View Post
Apply to staff, work on these changes together with other staff members. That's how self-managed communities work, no? Oh wait, you already were staff - and were first fired for leaking information, then given a second chance and tried your best to be as much of a headache for others as possible. That's not even my words, it's what people who were in charge of you said: "...this person does not belong on a functional staff team and will do his very best to wear at that team's infrastructure. His attitude is abrasive and conflict-oriented; anyone attempting to reason with him should be very aware that Ele is not one to reason, but instead one to drone on with no end in sight unless the other party has given in or he's gotten what he wants".

What a shocker, faint bitched and whined about me in my usernotes. If we're getting into specifics here, you wanna know why he bitched and whined? It's because I called him out on NOT DOING HIS JOB. Just like how I just now called you out on NOT DOING YOUR JOB with regards to that suggestions thread. If you people just DID YOUR JOBS, then I wouldn't have to hold you to account. But go ahead, continue to paint as being an unreasonable bad guy.

Classy move, btw, bringing up my staff history. I suppose 'poisoning the well' is easier than actually arguing real points though, huh?

also, @Icky bubby, I'm sorry for getting you fired by association from clan squad back then, I know you're still upset about that - But it all worked out for the best, didn't it?
Originally Posted by sir View Post
Staff do not always know what's best for the community, but usually, in fact, we do.

OK mommy.
Originally Posted by sir View Post
I think Urban Dictionary gives a fair description of what "harassment" is:
"Harassment is the act of bullying somebody based on their sexuality, race, religion, size, hair color, or anything like that. It is NOT considered harassment if you are just arguing unless one party is bullying you."
I feel like that's pretty much the way we've been handling moderation for like forever and kept it pretty stable in that sense - even lately when staff had to make some tough calls when it comes to moderation, especially in "Dear Cishet People" thread.

If you wanna roll with that definition of harassment, then roll with it. I'm just saying that you ought to include a definition.
Originally Posted by sir View Post
- Nowhere does it state that harassment isn't allowed. The line that says that it "may result in a ban" is kept, but anyone who likes to fight over semantics would be right to later point out that "they didn't know it's not allowed because rules don't say so". Specifically including the word "repetitive" would likely backfire too - this essentially means that you are allowed to go and throw the worst racisal / homophobic slur you can come up with towards some user and get away with it, literally because you didn't repeat it and thus stayed clear according to rules

With respect to my inclusion of 'repetitive', many sites specify frequency as a defining factor of harassment. As I said though, if you want to roll with urban dictionary's definition (of all places), then whatever, don't include it.

"Harassment is not allowed. It is defined as malicious targeted abuse (through insulting, name-calling, trolling and so on)."

The important takeaway from this adjustment is that it includes the term 'malicious' which speaks to the intent of the offender. This would make us folk who're concerned with context and intent happy.

Originally Posted by sir View Post
- "There is currently also a standing ban on the malicious usage of any homophobic or racial slurs..." - "currently" as in "we may rethink it later"? Might have misunderstood it, but if that's the correct meaning then this word is certainly shouldn't be there.

OK.
"There is a standing ban on the malicious usage of any homophobic or racial slurs..."
Fine by me.

Btw, I meant currently to mean 'currently'.
Originally Posted by sir View Post
- "Pornography/gore/warez etc. are not allowed in public spaces at any time for any reason within the Toribash community." - gore and warez aren't allowed anywhere on forums, including private boards. Would be better to either separate porn with gore + warez, or keep the rule as is with the addition of something like "unless stated otherwise by board rules".

Agreed.
"Pornography is not allowed in public spaces at any time for any reason within the Toribash community. Gore and warez are not allowed anywhere."

Originally Posted by sir View Post
By the way, Divine was absolutely right. How dare we not make a guy who's known to be an ass to work with make an admin, especially after one of community's worst racists and bigots said they should be one. Wow, staff bad.

Forgive me for injecting some humor into the discussion here. I don't actually want to be admin. I could not stand putting up with all the petty staff politics. I'll continue to work to change shit from the outside, if I see the need. And I'll continue holding staff to account.

Originally Posted by sir View Post
I suppose the whole point of this post of yours was to say "look at context, not at raw text", and this is what staff have been doing since the day automated in-game reports became a thing. The whole idea of that system was that we could get said context - because this way we can see the whole chat log and not only what the side that made the report included in their screenshots.
If you meant something else, please explain without tying it to racist bullshit that hipotibor shat out.

My point was about profiling not being an inherently racist thing. Which was a point that hipotibor made, amongst others.

This is like the 'currently' thing.
Originally Posted by sir View Post
Let's try to actually discuss how toxicity should be addressed in the community and not make bring in politics or some personal hate (looking at you drgonz).

You literally poisoned the well twice in your post bro, with me and tbash. Pot calling kettle black mate.

"anyone attempting to reason with him should be very aware that Ele is not one to reason, but instead one to drone on with no end in sight unless the other party has given in or he's gotten what he wants""
Shit, I compromised like 4 (!!!) times in this response... I'm breaking character.

It's almost like I respect valid points and... Reject (?!?) shitty ones. Pfft, how unreasonable, I can't work with this guy!

PS - If you're gonna spit the dummy, permaban and fuck me (like you did hipotibor) - Take me out for dinner first, would ya?
Last edited by Ele; Jan 26, 2020 at 04:40 PM.
This thread is just beyond stupid. I'm pretty sure most of stuff is fine as it is, some of y'all take this way too seriously. No need to invent the wheel again.
It's All About Expansion
This is my thread and I will close it whenever I decide everyone's viewpoints are terrible.
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Originally Posted by sir View Post
Sorry tbashboii, how dare we not make you feel safe and comfortable. Please let me know how many more accounts you would like to hijack, users to scam, or racist slurs to say. The fact that you are still allowed to play the game is fascinating on its own, and if I were you I'd try to stay as low as possible and not casually advocate for muslim people murderings, be toxic to other players in-game and keep breaking other forum rules. I'm even more amazed we haven't yet permabanned all of your accounts now that I've checked your current account's history, wow. Sure staff give no second chances, right



why didnt you then? would have saved me and everyone else a lot of headache

i'd also like to point out I was a little kid when I was doing any of these things you said (other than that muslim stuff on WIBBLES)
Last edited by Wounder; Jan 26, 2020 at 08:41 PM.
Originally Posted by basic View Post
this is just a toribash purification thread in disguise, good job greg

Hey I guess you're not the only one who's played the game "Off." The Batter purifying everything.
<a href=https://imgur.com/gallery/AnXm6 target=_blank>https://imgur.com/gallery/AnXm6</a>
Dargon Moderated Message:
Infracted for having the best goddamn replays in Toribash history.

Admittedly, the rules being changed
Originally Posted by sir View Post
for like half a year now.

I didn't really notice a change, that being said what was the purpose of the rule change besides specifying what a public space is?

My personal consensus;
Racial Slurs eg. nigger, kike, chink, jew(contextual) = Bad if used to insult someone, when used with friends or people that understand you're joking it should be fine.
Homophobic/Transphobic Slurs eg. faggot, homo, tranny etc. = Bad if used to insult someone, when used with friends or people that understand you're joking it should be fine.
Religious Slurs = Bad if used to insult someone, when used with friends or people that understand you're joking it should be fine.
Harassment eg. repeated posts/comments about or to a person/s that include insults and slurs of all kinds. Intentional jokes have their limits.
For inclusions sake, calling people transphobic, bigoted among other terms continuously I personally would view as harassment but this is up to whoever it's being directed towards.
Mislabeling isn't always a personal attack and wouldn't count as harassment, but being polite about it goes a long way still, up to whoever it's being directed to.


On a separate note
I think the rule changes to wibbles were unnecessary and issues could've been handled case-by-case.
What happened with Fyre and Maya were single cases that could've been handled pretty easily I think.
Instead of changing the rules in wibbles I think that it should be like Hall of glory/shame where you can only view and post in if you have the link instead of being able to be bought or viewed by any innocent 12 year old.
I don't know how possible this is but its an idea.
Originally Posted by hipotibor View Post
Relating to the forums, I will agree that use of racial slurs should be kept off the public and only in closed off spaces such as wibbles and clan boards since it gives the brand an image which is not mainstream friendly. If you don't like that type of language, don't visit those threads/boards.

I agree with what hipotibor says here, not sure how relevant the brand image is - I don't know about that but the "don't visit it if you don't like it" idea is here or there.
With Maya, she had the option to just not go to wibbles and didn't and fed the fire.

If staff doesn't want to moderate wibbles I'll volunteer.


Originally Posted by Greg View Post
This is my thread and I will close it whenever I decide everyone's viewpoints are terrible.

what would be the point of closing it smh
Last edited by id; Jan 26, 2020 at 10:27 PM. Reason: bruH
Originally Posted by phish View Post
Admittedly, the rules being changed
I didn't really notice a change, that being said what was the purpose of the rule change besides specifying what a public space is?

Before changing the rules, we've operated by this for some time. No one noticed and this is a good thing if you look at it. It means the process of changing over was sensible on our end as no one had complaints other than the obvious people yelling slurs and breaking substantial rules. If you don't do this, you have nothing to worry about. We've already talked ears off about context and wording, we get that concept. Fortunately for us, regular users do not come up with rules nor do they decide punishment, though we're always open for suggestions. I wanted to announce it for the sake of transparency; I did not expect this type of reaction other than people complaining about the new rules being released so late, that is a legitimate complaint.


My personal take on reworking the rules. Yes, it was to redefine what public spaces are, by specifying what private is. Changing what private is makes more things public. We went with the more literal sense of what private is. Can I physically join that room? If there's language that I don't like in that server, it's okay, because I can not physically join that server to see it. We wanted to clarify that we do NOT accept slurs, harassment, and more in our servers. If something gets reported we deal with it, no ifs, ands, or buts.


بسم الله الرحمان الرحيم


Originally Posted by Ele View Post
But go ahead, continue to paint as being an unreasonable bad guy.

Nobody's saying you're always unreasonable, but you sure do love arguing for the sake of it, no matter how absurd it gets.

If you wanna roll with that definition of harassment, then roll with it. I'm just saying that you ought to include a definition.

Why though, just so that someone can find a loophole in that specific definition, abuse that and later whine after they still get banned? I've never seen people struggling with defining what "harassment" is to this day, and I still doubt that going too specific about such rules is the way to go.

Please keep in mind that what you think isn't harassment may be very much it for others. For example, I can hardly see Maya calling anyone here a bigot or transphobe being harassment due to a number of factors (apart from them already being in (at least partial) disagreement with Maya's words, them getting called so likely being a rare occurence and thus not actually affecting them in any way emotionally), but when someone casually tells Maya that "what you did to yourself is wrong" in a random room is harassment - trans people get that from all sorts of idiots all the time, there being absolutely no good intent in saying so, etc.

Outlining every aspect of what may be harassment and what isn't would get us an overly long set of rules (which already is an issue with current rules) that nobody would end up reading. Thankfully we're not a country but an online game, and we can afford ourselves to rely on users' common sense to decide what harassment is and what isn't. If they actually think that throwing racial or homophobic/transphobic slurs at someone is fine, they should probably be kept away from the community.

"Harassment is not allowed. It is defined as malicious targeted abuse (through insulting, name-calling, trolling and so on)."

The important takeaway from this adjustment is that it includes the term 'malicious' which speaks to the intent of the offender. This would make us folk who're concerned with context and intent happy.

My point was about profiling not being an inherently racist thing. Which was a point that hipotibor made, amongst others.

Interesting how one can read a wall of racist shit literally containing a link to the text that reads as, I quote:
“It is well known that the Jew in his natural function as a biological parasite must not only control the thoughts of his host people if he is to survive, but he must also establish their thought patterns and maintain supervision of them. Thus, the gentiles, or host people, are taught to respect and obey the smaller, weaker parasitic organism which is taking his sustenance, making him ill, and slowly destroying him. The entire host/parasite relationship flouts the most basic law of nature, the instinct of survival and of self-preservation. The Jew, being numerically weaker, must if he is to survive, train the host to tolerate his presence, and to allow him to control the host. ” — Eustace Mullins

- and see some points about "profiling not being a racist thing". Are you sure we're speaking about same posts that he made? And even then, how is profiling based on race related to moderation within an online video game? Again, you're arguing here just to make a point, it isn't getting anywhere.

We do profiling based on offender's history, which is, again, a thing that's been done in Toribash for as long as I remember. If they did shit in past, they may get harsher punishment - just how Bailey and hipotibor got their permanent bans recently. We know enough about their history to safely assume that their intentions are malicious and that they will do same thing again after getting unbanned. It's also same case with Smurf, who is known for being toxic to other players and thus getting a way more strict punishment for harassing Maya.

There's only a little other information we can actually use when it comes to Toribash, and it will always be very subjective and based on lots of barely reasonable assumptions. For example, there are quite a bunch of accounts owned by Russians that were involved in scam duels, and we assume that any Russian user is now a bigger threat compared to other players by default. But this won't actually be true, because if you take a closer look it'd likely only be a few real people who owned those accounts involved in scamming - and because of them regular players who just want to play the game are now getting an unfair treatment. Same applies to stereotyping people based on their clan, while them being a part of a group of people notorious for breaking rules or acting toxic doesn't inherently mean that they must have malicious intentions behind anything they do. Assuming otherwise would only mean lazy moderation to me, and I doubt anyone here would like to get worse treatment because staff decided they belong to a group of people that deems more questionnable than others.

You literally poisoned the well twice in your post bro, with me and tbash. Pot calling kettle black mate.

Sorry, don't like it when people who are known to among the community's worst or were given chances and fucked up act as if they know everything better and thus staff are bad.
If you have suggestions on how to improve things (and not actually act on it, because you don't want "petty politics"), suggest them in a peaceful way. This doesn't mean those changes will be implemented, but not being an asshat about everything you say would certainly help. When things don't get done in a way you want or are delayed before being implemented it isn't because staff want to make the community worse and kill the game, it's because staff are also real people who have real lives (how many times does this have to be said?) and there's nobody else willing to do what they do but better. I'm literally the only staff member involved in community management who is working for Nabi, and I'm not even paid for doing like half of the things I end up doing. And surely nobody is enjoying their time here arguing with you when you feel bored. We do what we can, but you can't expect grown people to be as active in an online game as all the teens we had in staff were 7-10 years ago.

Also, amazing how same people who accuse Maya of being overly aggressive and thus not really being helpful act exact same way when they aren't getting what they think is right. What a shocker that staff don't really want to take you seriously, Ele.


Originally Posted by phish View Post
Admittedly, the rules being changed
I didn't really notice a change, that being said what was the purpose of the rule change besides specifying what a public space is?

Ed pretty much covered that in his response, the only thing I'd like to note is to once again point out the main issue with the old definition of private rooms was that they allowed users to be openly toxic to anyone around them as long as they're not inside a "public" space. While you can argue that there are always ways to solve that (leave the room if it's OP being toxic / kick a toxic user if you're OP), this doesn't really solve the issue of that user being toxic. There's no real reason to keep ignoring them acting this way if it's happening continuously because they "only do it in their own room", so it's way more efficient for us to handle any report that we get independently of the room type where offence took place.

I think the rule changes to wibbles were unnecessary and issues could've been handled case-by-case.
What happened with Fyre and Maya were single cases that could've been handled pretty easily I think.
Instead of changing the rules in wibbles I think that it should be like Hall of glory/shame where you can only view and post in if you have the link instead of being able to be bought or viewed by any innocent 12 year old.
I don't know how possible this is but its an idea.

It's possible, but we chose another way to handle it.
I wasn't originally a huge fan of the change because I could see it easily backfiring to get us to an even worse state that before, but Wibbles seems much more civil now so the decision was likely correct. The alternative of getting Wibbles killed completely that several staff members were suggesting during discussion would've been way worse imo.