 http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/414442Dont think specs should be adding labels like this. Also from the same game, I reported Gajop for adding this label on my base which violates the COC:  You can see he posts a label which says "innapropriate picture of a lobster". You can clearly see that it is on my base. I am not playing the victim, because I dont really care. BUT, its a violation of the COC, and if the rule applies for one, then it applies for all. If I was a new player, I would probably be less than thrilled to see this.
+4 / -5
|
{inappropriate lobster comment}
+12 / -1
|
{A highly appropriate, insightful comment}
+5 / -0
|
If you don't mind we don't mind. Victimless crime. The CoC is there to provide a framework for a prosperous community. It is not an ends in itself.
+4 / -0
|
Didnt 1 of you two used to be an admin until quite recently?
+1 / -0
|
Snugglebase, I think you are missing the point. I may not care, but if he does this to other players, new players for example, that may not know how to report and screen shot etc, then he is harming the game. They might just decide to not bother coming back.
+0 / -0
|
For starters, newbies won't even notice the label and in case they do, they won't even understand it. If you feel offended because someone called you something then feel free to report, but don't report because you think something as innoffensive as that will offend other people who probably aren't as whiny as you.
+2 / -0
|
{white on black silhouette of a fish head next to a fishing hook, mouth agape
+7 / -0
|
Show me where he touched you on this doll.  {I still can't tell if you're seriously offended by this or if you're trolling, but this social justice thing is getting a bit old.} A thicker protective exoskeleton may help deal with it? Also do you need to post the fact that you report people publicly? Are you trying to create a discussion over that? Because I'm not really interested in explaining or debating any single sentence (especially when it was essentially just me saying "Hi. I read your forum post" and not part of greater argument).
+13 / -0
|
So calling player lobster is CoC violation? Dont undersant that point of view.
+4 / -0
|
|
|
Is lobster a positive thing to say? Its easy enough to avoid any mis-understanding by just not doing it in the first place. If you have to put a label down on a player, theres plenty more positive ways of doing this without any likelihood of it being misconstrued.
+1 / -0
|
|
|
I agree Senaven, I think the COC should make a specific reference to the use of the term lobster. That would avoid any mis-understanding.
+0 / -0
|
And because people could not keep the 10 commandments we have today hundreds of thousands of laws
+7 / -0
|
Specific words are not against the Code of Conduct. Nor should they be. What is against the CoC is being hostile and abusive. That includes calling someone something that is meant to be insulting, regardless of the word used. Note that good-natured banter is tolerated, even if it uses words that would otherwise be insulting. How can you tell the difference between good-natured banter and abuse? If the other party was upset by it and reported you for it, then you probably crossed the line. That's one reason that Snugglebass properly discounted Matsuda's complaint in the OP - he wasn't upset by it.
+0 / -0
|
From #zk chat: quote:
[12:28 PM] Matsuda Newsflash: zero K allows victimless crimes
[12:29 PM] Matsuda Admins no longer have a mandate to act without a player report
[12:40 PM] Matsuda theoretical exampl then, an admin in a game room decides to apply the COC and penalise a player. According to the above, they shouldnt do it beause its a framwork only, and if no one else minds(i.e. no report) neither do they. |
Nothing you said there is correct. Admins are free to provide warnings or impose penalties whenever they believe the CoC has been violated, even without a report. The question at hand in your OP is whether Gajop was being hostile or abusive. This is always a judgement call. One factor which the moderators take into consideration is whether the target of the insults considered it hostile and abusive. If they make a report, that's suggestive (but not conclusive) that they do; if they don't make a report, that's suggestive (but not conclusive) that they don't. In the specific case at hand, even though you did file a report, you then explicitly said in this thread that you don't care. That's suggestive (but not conclusive) that Gajop wasn't being hostile or abusive.
+1 / -0
|
Something happened and nobody cared (presumably, if you don't care, why should anyone else care). Now you care that nobody cared despite you yourself not caring. The way I see it, the CoC is enforceable if both of the following conditions are met: 1) - someone is justifiably upset by the actions of another player 2) - the other player was in a position to predict their actions causing upset So calling someone a lobster is an action that people know can cause upset. But that isn't sufficient for mod intervention. Someone actually has to be upset. So when you call someone a name you're taking a chance. It doesn't matter how many lobsters you draw in an empty room. Nobody cares, so nobody cares. I'm glad to hear that it doesn't upset you when people liken you to a lobster. I'll keep this in mind when next you start a thread looking for fuel to denounce the mods. quote:
[12:28 PM] Matsuda Newsflash: zero K allows victimless crimes
[12:29 PM] Matsuda Admins no longer have a mandate to act without a player report
[12:40 PM] Matsuda theoretical exampl then, an admin in a game room decides to apply the COC and penalise a player. According to the above, they shouldnt do it beause its a framwork only, and if no one else minds(i.e. no report) neither do they. |
+4 / -0
|
A perfect example would be me and   Svatopluk screaming nab/nub/noob/lobster/fuuu at each other during the game I don't care and neither does Svatopluk, it's just a funny tickling nothing more Imho CoC should be applied only when there is a clear abuse(malicous tk/selfd, clear insults, inappropriate behavior with nebs) or when it was reported =) The intent matters
+6 / -0
|
I don't think players see spectators' markers, do they?
+0 / -0
|
