Halloween on the 31st!

General Discussion
1

Halloween is on 31st, but the event ends way before that, it’s super weird how it’s like that, I mean why would they do that?

it’s Halloween event, it taking place on Halloween should fill out Halloween spirit and let us express ourselves through Halloween skins, I never even got the chance to buy my new favorite skin, Halloween whitemane, it looked really cool and I wanted it

why’d they do this? hope they reconsider in the future

ok the entire first half of the post was a bunch of nonsense to hide the thread from being locked by making a generic, common topic

i am actually trying to address censorship and/or unjust moderation on the forums, the first case of me seeing this was with the thread “forum moderators crossing the line” thread, i didn’t really take the person seriously or think there was any actual censorship taking place on the forums, then it was deleted out of no where for seemingly no reason, it was not a “public support ticket” but an in general criticism/discussion of censorship/moderator actions on the forums while mentioning a specific instance as an example https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/heroes/t/forum-moderators-crossing-the-line/2178/26

i then made another thread asking where it went/why it was deleted, you can see the whole thing here Where did the thread about forum moderators crossing the line go?

strangely enough there was another thread that was basically like mine and didn’t get deleted/locked Apparently the original Mod Crossing the line was deleted - #44 by SpicyMayo26-1710

then there was this thread, where someone was expressing their discontent with censorship on the forums

that was locked + made unlisted

i made a thread https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/heroes/t/its-up-to-3-now/2757/2 which basically talked about how blizzard was censoring the forums and the 3 threads were all treated unjustly, with the “cannot talk about disciplinary action rule” being a flawed rule that can be used to close innocent topics, i posted it at 2:00 a. m., i woke up 11: 00 a. m., refreshed the page to see the replies and it was gone, it was an open criticism

i really feel like the forums are undergoing censorship/unjust moderation, i don’t know what else to do since i loved going to this place all the time (had 600+ posts on the previous forum) but i feel censorship is a serious transgression that shouldn’t be overlooked, it’s hard to express this to other people when every thread i make about it gets locked

6 Likes
2

It seems that the mods do not like criticism about them.

Saying that your scared of making criticism about the game and or devs? NO

Saying that the game is bad? YES

Making a thread to let people disccuss their opinions of the forum moderators current state of decisions particularly about themselves about this? NO

MFPallytime raging about you in a game? NO

Doing anything that regards matchmaking? YES! But we wont actually do it

Looks like the constitution for freedom of speech is invalid.

1 Like
3

“it seems that Blizzard does not like criticism about Blizzard”

i fixed that for you Dj. heh.

the very first bliz forum post on a bliz forum was probably locked then deleted…

seriously, that is why the blizz fanboy meme is so strong, any criticism is swiftly censored and swept under the rug…

4 Likes
4

Blizzard cares only on February 31st, and no other day off the year.

1 Like
6

Criticizing Blizzard is “frowned upon” according to their code of conduct.

Whatever the heck that means. Kek.

4 Likes
7

just wanted to say I love your posts on mei and I’ve been reading them since the last forum, they make me laugh every time, thanks for posting

8

I gotta say, I agree with you on the aspect of the event ending early. I legit got online today and realized it ended. I have been playing HotS since launch week, And every year it is always in the same windows
(Previous Dates include:
2015 Oct 27th, 2015 - Nov 17th, 2015
2016 Oct25th, 2016 - Nov 8th, 2016
2017 Oct 17th, 2017 - Nov 14th, 2017)

Then you have this year… Sept 25th, 2018 - Oct 15th, 2018.

Like why did they decided to change it all of a sudden? I have been dumping my money into Blizz for literally a decade. The SAME THINGS happen every year. At the same time. I know when I log into WoW, Hallow’s End will be there. Same with all the other events. But to change it entirely like that? almost a month early? I think it simply isn’t fair, considering we have to wait an entire year for another chance at this. They have always had consistency in their other games like WoW, So I was expecting the same from this. Apparently not. I’m disappointed they dropped the ball this year.

2 Likes
11

admittedly they had it’s ending date on the page for it up since the beginning, but i can also symphethize with people who would at least expect that it would still be there by Halloween (or like 2 weeks before Halloween), i think the change it date may have something to do with wanting to have something separate to show at blizzcon so they release it early

13

Although the ending date was already known, it’s stupid to have Halloween themed events on a event that doesn’t even go to Halloween. If this wasn’t the Halloween event then are they even going to do an event for Halloween and if they do, how do they differentiate the prizes from the previous event?

SMH

1 Like
14

Here’s an idea: try following the code of conduct and actually try reading the stuff people post to warn you about forum violations.

If you want to complain about non-heroes of the storm things, then go to other boards such as classic, or send blizz a tweet or the like. The topical basis here is just the one game.

If you want to convey concerns regarding your “constitional rights” then i suggest you actually read the coc or take a constition credit (supposed to be required for highschool and college last i checked) cuz the basis of your complaint is out of ignorance. Heck, go hit up some news articles for recent events where some places are finding out that the lack of enforcing “censorship” is contributing a hefty bit of harm

There is a myriad of other things you can literally be doing instead of ignoring things and then repeating yourself

16

firstly I feel that talking about censorship on the heroes of the storm forum is related enough to heroes of the storm to belong on the heroes of the storm forum

secondly, how am I supposed to read about how the thread broke/violated the code of conduct when only 2 of the 4 threads that got locked/deleted received citations from the code of conduct for so as to why they were deleted, the others were deleted for seemingly no reason and one of them was made unlisted, and there’s not as much as a method of appeal for what you feel is an unjust ban/lock from what I can see, and even trying to discuss to will lead to another lock/deletion, the system is flawed as seen with those 4 threads and other threads in the future

i’m not even trying to argue constitutional or legal rights and they were not mentioned in my post, i’m saying from a moral standpoint the people who had their threads locked were innocent and rules that allow for that sets a bad precedent for the future of the forums since it means they’re allowed to censor whatever they want, which is bad

the first ever megathread and most popular thread on the forum doesn’t even talk about the game itself, it talks about the overall forum design/policy which is the exact same thing i’m trying to do with this thread/my previous threads, it’s fine to talk about that, and censorship is much more important than downvotes

17

Even if you didn’t express “freed of speech” directly, there’s this thing called “subtext” as the underlying theme of what people write, so even without a verbatim example of a specific phrase, the content and reference is still implied.

…and you tend to agree with others that bring it up, which cements the notion of you wanting it to be there in your subtext. The whole basis of why you would think the ‘censorship’ to be ‘unfair’ would have to have a basis in some sort of ‘right’ or assurance that you feel you get to do something, rather than just ‘on principal for the sake of conversational variety’

Much of the whole of your subtext continues to stem from willful ignorance. Part of the narrative I get from your writing is that you haven’t read the “please read before posting” topics and instead want to be told summaries of it on specific cases and will then otherwise continue to do more of the same if your hand is not personally held for all your posts. Problem with that idea, is the ‘please read’ topics, and links therein say that the hand-holding isn’t going to happen :confused:

Some of ‘moral’-stance seems to come from the selective memory you seem to exhibit between one topic to another, such as the notion you didn’t bring up “legal rights” specifically in the post in this topic, but still recycle much of the same phrases and link to other topics that may have that same concern, even if not expressed verbatim for you to recognize in this topic.

“Your access to these forums is a “privilege,” and not a “right.”

The “rights” or “moral” concerns you have regarding your desires for expression don’t necessarily apply in the context of these forums as this is a ‘private’ domain, not a public one, and in which case, your ‘rights’ aren’t being violated as you’re not being censored by the government, though I’d surmise you might associate the ‘authority’ of blizzard here to be a government and thus try to lump the association form one to the other.

However, the instance on ‘moral’ concerns here is ironic and the ‘moral’ here would be based on following the code of conduct, ie the guidelines of expected behavior (and protection) on these boards, rather than the insistence that it only selectively applies when you so want it to do so.

In the post of yours I quoted, the notion of people being able to "post how they want’ could include gibberish, spam, obscenity, libel, false pretenses (such as using code scripts to modify poster appearance to look like a blue/dev) and a myriad of other things you’d then find yourself not wanting to have of the forums.

The code, and abiding by it, is a means to suggest blizz will offer to ‘protect’ the forums from chinese/korean/whatever spam bots that used to flood the old forum (and cause the aggressive spam filter shinanigans) and other stuff if posters are willing to follow it themselves.

Part of the consequence of people fixating on ‘censorship’ is that they tend to do so out of ignorance of things like the CoC, or where their ‘rights’ apply, and then perpetuate multiple violations in pursuit of their concerns of “unjust” action.

Here’s the thing: this topic, as is, is effectual spam (recycling the use of certain phrases) looks to curtail moderator action, cross-link topics apart from the topic (hi, click-bait title) is creating a duplicate topic (both in name and content) uses a misleading title, and discussion locked topic with the impression that the poster hasn’t read the CoC, to which it is their responsibility to do so as a condition of using these forums.

The issue of not ‘talking’ about these sort of things is because they tend to just land out in off-topic central that perpetuates a cycle of CoC violations.

Part of your expressed concern doesn’t even seem to consider that other posters here may have chosen to report the topics mentioned before, as the flag tag exists, as that may be apart of why some topics saw action that others did not.

However, the expectation should be the same and people should attempt to adhere to the code given for the expected conduct on these boards and thus make ‘moral’ posts based on that standard, rather than one they think is the case, and thus want to impose on others with selective adherence to what or where they think it matters.

2 Likes
19

There are three things that define Bli$$ard right now.

  1. Greed
  2. Incompetence
  3. Censorship

The only people who are defending Bli$$ard at this point are hardcore fanboys with deep pockets who are all to eager to throw their money away.

20

The RIP downvotes thread isn’t really “popular” it just has the same few people posting in it over and over

21

I don’t think you understand what i’m trying to say

i am not trying to have a subtext or make an argument all about legal rights, of course i desire for freedom of speech because i think it is a good thing and i don’t know why you wouldn’t too

regardless of whether or not this is a private domain and blizzard can do whatever they want on it, i’m saying that censoring innocent posts is wrong and blizzard did it with those 4 threads and i’m trying to call them out for it

a private domain (to a certain extent) can make all the rules that they want to and run things as they want, but does this mean that the rules they make can’t be bad or that they never run things poorly? i’m saying that the rule “about not being allowed to talk about disciplinary actions” was used to censor multiple innocent posts whose main purpose was to evoke authentic discussion, not be harmful, having forum moderation allowing that may be within their rights but it doesn’t stop the forums from becoming a worse place or less moral, which is something you wouldn’t want

the coc should not be treated as “an almighty law from above”, human morality is inherent and does not stem from the CoC, taking greater precedence, i’m aware that it says “don’t talk about disciplinary actions” in the CoC, but i saw 2 guys who posted honest/innocent criticisms got their posts locked under this rule, so of course I’m going to discuss it anyways because i don’t feel it was fair for their posts to be locked and I value them + their right to post over blizzard’s forum CoC, the human moral obligation towards one another takes precedence over that

“…could include gibberish, spam, obscenity, libel, false pretenses (such as using code scripts to modify poster appearance to look like a blue/dev) and a myriad of other things you’d then find yourself not wanting to have of the forums…”

that’s the precise thing, the threads that were censored were far from this and were basically genuine discussion/criticism, they didn’t deserve to be locked and were not mindless spam at all

“Here’s the thing: this topic, as is, is effectual spam (recycling the use of certain phrases) looks to curtail moderator action, cross-link topics apart from the topic (hi, click-bait title) is creating a duplicate topic (both in name and content) uses a misleading title, and discussion locked topic with the impression that the poster hasn’t read the CoC, to which it is their responsibility to do so as a condition of using these forums.”

this topic is not spam, i don’t know what phrases that you’re even talking about but even if i did know surrepetitious diction /=/ spam, it does look to curtail moderator action but it only does that because i feel like the moderators are acting unjustly in this scenario, i had no choice but to make the title like that because if i didn’t it would hastily deleted (as the other threads i linked), I linked other posts so I could make an example/reference what I was saying, similar to what you did in your reply

the rule is literally “you can’t talk about how we moderate/discipline people or we’ll lock you’re thread”, and a thread which was called “i’m literally afraid of giving criticism” was locked + made unlisted, all i’m doing is bringing attention to this because I feel it’s important for the prosperity of the forums and wouldn’t be fair to remain unbeknownst

imagine what would happen If such a rule was mirrored in actual law, if you talked about government disciplinary action (even in a general sense) the government could lock you up, the forums shouldn’t have a policy that does the same

@thanos well the point is there are indeed other threads on the forum that talk about the forum in general instead of specifically the game

22

no its not.

The rule is “literally”

  • Creating posts or threads to discuss disciplinary actions taken against a player, including chat logs and email correspondence between a player and a Game Master (GM)
  • Creating posts or threads to discuss disciplinary actions taken against a character or account on the forums

when you have a topic where the OP goes “blizz just silenced my account, I didn’t agree with them, so let me make an alt with a politically-charged name to announce that I am”

  1. discussion the actions taken against [me]
  2. announcing that [I] made an alternate account to circumvent the ban
  3. demonstrating that [i] am willing to violate multiple statutes of the CoC
  4. an so on, depending on the case.

The functional distinction for you is that you’re willing to assume some cases to be ‘innocent’ when the claims are not, and in conjunction with that admit you’re willing to violate multiple rules for the sake of “morality” to which you have tried to compare the basis of your concern for “freedom to speech” or rather, “censorship” to murder.

You are essentially making a willful argument out of ignorance and willfully declaring yourself to impose that your standards are better than the people that have essentially devised a contract for the things at hand. if posters have concerns regarding their select case, then there are supposed to be outlets for it, rather than making topics that essentially break down into particular forum violations to where they ignore why they’re violations, ignore what the ‘rule’ was supposed to be, and then try to impose their own particular standard all the while clamoring for ‘justice’ in a name that doesn’t suit the hypocrisy manifest in their actions.

Contrary to your claim, I know very well what you’re “trying to say”. I doubt you know what is it you’re trying to say as you’re too busy occupying yourself with how you “feel” to think the entirety of what you ‘mean’ and instead argue circles of semantics in a pointless tirade that literally doesn’t matter.

If people want to discussion particular conduct of the boards all they need do is not violate the CoC in how they compose their posts. Some topics persisted before and persist now because some of the content doesn’t match the "innocent’ posts as you so claim: they have examples of breaking the CoC in multiple cases, and tend to be prior offenders adding additional violations to the list.

So first clue, don’t admit to specifics or copy/paste emails or whatever and maybe just keep things to hypotheticals or, gasp, suggestions instead of pretending you have some magical cause to try to ‘win’ by a voice that literally isn’t going to step in to argue against you.

I mean I’ve pointed out instances of how the basis of your conduct and arguement is needlessly persisting in willful ignorance, but do you literally not know how to use the quote features?

Cuz if you were as honest as you so claim for the ‘morality’ of which you want to champion, you’d dong yourself some ‘moral wrongs’ by not so being better informed of the environment and conditions by which you assert the ‘privilege’ of being on these boards.

Instead of checking on what you, by action, thus commit to follow, but don’t, you persist in pronouncing impulsive feelings that suit you on a whim.

It’d help if you bothered to even know what that “freedom entailed” or how any actually work in a cooperative environment. The capacity to have ‘rights’ and to have those ‘rights’ protected come from people being willing to give up some of their inherent ‘rights’ to someone else. In this case, I agree to the CoC as both a means to say I will adhere to it with the expectation that blizzard will then enforce the CoC to ‘protect’ my experience on the boards by sanctioning those that violate it.

I would rather posters be topically focused and experienced in the things they’re willing to discuss, this game, and then have spam bots, smurf-posters and zealots cast off as a means to reduce potential clutter on the boards as I would rather be in an environment where the topics are refined to topical expectations instead of any joe-shmoe that has a chip on their shoulder looking for a place to vent.

But instead of considering graduations of how ‘agreements’ work, or how people may not be so ‘innocent’ as you so claim, you’re content to skirt things you don’t know, don’t noticed and then look for someone else to blame to suit the demands of your ‘moral’ assertions.

The trouble with that, is you’re willing to announce your double-standards, which seems pretty silly to try to advocate for ‘holier-than-thou’ claims when you literally don’t even need to bother with your crusade if you’d put in a bit more effort to the context at hand.
“its human morality when I say so, but not a violation of my 'moral’s when I’m literally denouncing my morals to cherry-pick parts to suit me on different levels.”

The CoC is ‘literally’ a moral code for the board, so all you need do is actually read it (not pretend you know the contents) and then compose yourself in ways that aren’t an obvious issue. Given you don’t see ‘obvious’ issues with the topics that were so locked, yea, that might be hard for you, but ya know, instead of spending, what, how many hours pretending you had to be worried about being sanctioned over minor details, there are far better ways you could literally be using your time

some of which include:
a) playing the game
b) reading topics that don’t worry about breaking the CoC
c) seeing all the examples of feedback people put out that don’t worry about some front for "zomg my ‘freedom of speech’
d) reading the forum syntax pin so you know all the cool features these boards allow (esp for formatting posts to be easier to read)
e) making posts regarding your moral/civil concerns on outlets where it will actually do something. Cuz hint hint “calling them out on it” doesn’t do anything.

If the concerns you have for you ‘freedom’ were as so dire as you assert with proliferating topics like this, then it wouldn’t matter as your topic would literally be banned from the onset and you’d be unable to voice the concern.

Oh but hey, people can. So ya know, really shoots a hole in your rant perspective here when the basic issue tends to come down to… you and what you choose to neglect.

Most of the tripe you’re posting is about projecting and hypothetical yields that are vastly different cuz, surprise, surprise, this is a private domain, and businesses have the ‘right’ to create those. In your mess of ignorance, you’re essentially trying to assert your ‘rights’ are greater than others, therefore, contrary to the term of agreement you made, you want to take ‘rights’ away from others.

Yea, imagine if that were a ‘government’ instance too.

What would help the ‘prosperity’ of the forums would be people putting in the effort to be knowledgable about what they post and how they conduct themselves by following a few simple guidelines.

These aren’t “bad rules” as you’re trying to hypothesize and most of which curb “bad” behaviors that can be found in a myriad of environments that don’t offer the same sort of agreement, or ‘privilege’ as the ones here do.

Have you ever considered to ask “why” some of these policies exist, or are you just content to remain in more bliss of not knowing or thinking about it?

1 Like
26
  • Creating posts or threads to discuss disciplinary actions taken against a player, including chat logs and email correspondence between a player and a Game Master (GM)
  • Creating posts or threads to discuss disciplinary actions taken against a character or account on the forums

having this rule is what then lead to the people who spoke about the discipline/moderation getting their threads locked when all it was essentially merely criticism or expression of opinion

“… compare the basis of your concern for “freedom to speech” or rather, “censorship” to murder.”

i was not attempting to make a direct comparison comparing to murder, i was using murder in a hyperbolic sense through an hypothetical situation to emphasize/illustrate a point, if you say “i’m so hungry i could eat a horse” you’re probably not talking about eating an actual horse but want to emphasize something through hyperbole

“willfully declaring yourself to impose that your standards are better…”

i am not trying to impose personal standards, i am trying to urgently insist or suggest upon standards that allow for 100% freedom of speech and fair treatment towards all fair posts on the forums, which i feel would be better than standards that don’t allow them, putting emphasis on an argument does not mean i am imposing them on anyone nor could i even if i wanted to

“…than the people that have essentially devised a contract for the things at hand”

lawmakers aren’t perfect all the time and can sometimes write laws which may lead to abuses despite having been the ones that wrote them, it’s occurred many times throughout history as well as it has with the development of the game, the developers have made mistakes/bugs many times and do their best to make up for it, i am trying to indicate a possible flaw in the CoC and using 4 examples of abuses of one of it’s rules

" if posters have concerns regarding their select case, then there are supposed to be outlets for it…"

that is yet another issue, as far as i know there is no method of appeal for what you perceive to be an unjust lock on the forums, trying to make a forum thread discussing it (see the ones i cited) lead to them getting lock/deleted, even when a specific example was monetarily mentioned in order to emphasize a point rather than being the main topic of the thread, essentially if you saw a thread get censored/or you felt was unjustly locked or banned you can neither say nor appeal anything about it (which is what happened with me)

“So first clue, don’t admit to specifics or copy/paste emails…”

if you’re talking about this thread i am linking the other threads to use as an example so people know what i am talking about, just as you linked/quoted the “Read before posting” as an example to illustrate what you were talking about, if you’re talking about the other threads they did not copy/paste emails or what have you as an example, they referenced or talked about things as a part of their point, (just as how you and i referenced other things for what we talked about by mentioning previous posts), it is difficult to illustrate this when half of them are locked but the other people who did read them would probably attest to that

“I mean I’ve pointed out instances of how the basis of your conduct and argument is needlessly persisting in willful ignorance, but do you literally not know how to use the quote features?”

it’s not about being more or less ignorant towards the CoC, it doesn’t matter how many times i read the rule, if i compare the 4 posts and the CoC side by side i see a potential flaw in the CoC rather than inherent in the posts, if they were to allow such posts to be removed, the nature of the posts were not things like spam bots, off-topic threads, viruses, or inherently harmful things which deserve to actually be deleted, they were basically discussions threads similar to this one (which is why i changed the title this time so it wouldn’t get locked right away) and had no reason to be removed, these types of threads should be allowed since they’er enabling healthy discussion of forum policy which is related enough to the game/forum to belong on the forum

“'its human morality when I say so, but not a violation of my ‘moral’s when I’m literally denouncing my morals to cherry-pick parts to suit me on different levels’”

i don’t know what you’re trying to say with this, i’m saying it’s a humanly moral thing to stand up for another person that is treated unfairly which is what i saw another another moderator to to multiple posters so that’s what i did, i don’t know when i denounced my own morals or cherry picked anything to suit me since a large part of the post is for their sake as well, please be specific

“The CoC is ‘literally’ a moral code for the board”

as i said earlier, we shouldn’t be treating the CoC as a moral code, but a civil code, codes which are meant to maintain order rather than be the ultimate source of what is morally correct, moral and civil codes are separate from one another, i feel like the CoC would be contradicting the former if it allows for future threads to be locked in the same manner, and if it does i will choose one over the other and not shut up about because it doesn’t help the forum be any better

“Given you don’t see ‘obvious’ issues with the topics that were so locked, yea, that might be hard for you,”

the first thread i made at the start of the whole fiasco was called “why was the thread about moderators crossing the line locked?”, i was not trying to remain in willful ignorance at all, but was directly asking as to what (according to the CoC) would’ve been wrong with the post to merit it’s removal or maybe there was a legitimate reason behind it, this would indicate that my stance is not trying to come from someone being purposefully blind/willfully ignorant towards the CoC but actually from one who was trying to understand it and give it a chance, since i am trying to ask/understand it,
the original post was actually fairly objective

the issue came to play when almost every thread after that even talking about it would get almost immediately removed and i don’t feel that it was at all, if i have an opinion to voice on the CoC where or how can i do it? or if i saw a moderator censor someone/something or lock unfairly am i allowed to talk about it? these are things that i do not seem to be allowed to do and i don’t feel it’s right at all and can just led to censorship, as it did with the threads that i was talking about

“Most of the tripe you’re posting is about projecting and hypothetical yields that are vastly different cuz, surprise, surprise, this is a private domain, and businesses have the ‘right’ to create those. In your mess of ignorance, you’re essentially trying to assert your ‘rights’ are greater than others, therefore, contrary to the term of agreement you made, you want to take ‘rights’ away from others.”

as i said earlier “…having forum moderation allowing that may be within their rights but it doesn’t stop the forums from becoming a worse place or less moral", it’s not about whether or not the forums as a private domain can do whatever they want and censor people based upon their rights, it’s that them having the right to do that doesn’t make the actions any better, censorship is still immoral and just lead to a bad forum

the hots developers can make the game so that every character starts with 1 hp and you’re attacks only damage minions because it’s their game and they can design it as they please, just like a private domain can censor or have rules enabling censorship, but it doesn’t mean that the game would be made to be any more fun if it were designed, or that the forum doesn’t turn into a worse place if they do, which is what i’m arguing, not as a matter of rights (neither mine or theirs) but as a matter of letting the forum be an actual good place that allows there to be 100% freedom of speech through the usage of those rights, which is a good way to use them (and i don’t see why you wouldn’t want it)

the reason i’m spending the time on this instead of other things is because this is stuff that actually matters, censorship is a serious sin and trying to address/discuss it matters more than playing the game again for the umpteenth time or making a post about mal’ganis being overpowered or something which is just about video games

27

No, it doesn’t “actually” matter. (cuz ya know, that bit I wrote on ‘calling them out’ isn’t doing to do anything, but ya know, lets ignore that)

You’ve convinced yourself that it does, and then you disregard what doesn’t suit you while you make a ‘holier than thou’ rant that undermines your efforts because you don’t notice the conflict with your cause and your conduct.

You forgo the delineation of how things are enforced to blur the notion of ‘protection’ vs ‘censorship’ because you want to advocate for an extreme (100% freedom of speech) out of ignorance because you don’t like the idea of "censorship’, but evidently, you’re willing to ‘censor’ what you notice.

Your response to me is a line-item list that replies to specific choices of words on the impulsive response as you see them, and then you move on to the next item. Your fixation on items in sequences causes you to overlook that you do the same thing in your own posts, and overlook where you post contradiction from one line to the next because you’re already focused on the next line, that the previous doesn’t ‘matter’ anymore: because you posted it, and you already agree with yourself, you’re allowed to skimp on that and assume it consistent and ‘good’.

The problem with this is that you end up disagreeing on principals, not on particulars, and in effect your conduct becomes contrary to the claim, so then you overlook particulars in your own regard to agree with stuff on principal, and then claim its all “good” or "better’ than something more consistent in effect.

Yes, for you it does’t matter how many times you “read” the rule because you’re demonstrating cognitive bias. This is especially evident in that you literally “quote” a line asking if you know how to use the quote functions on the board and then denounce it doesn’t matter that you impose willful ignorance on yourself while demonstrating you don’t know how to use the quote tools.

if you were more familiar with the tools available on these forums, then you wouldn’t need to ‘spend’ as much time on stuff that ‘doesn’t matter’ (such as formatting and visual esthetics) in favor of things that do ‘matter’, such as what is actually written.

The extent for my concern of your 'ignorance, and ‘acting’ on that can be seen in both principal of argument, but also in conduct of posting.

“i’m not trying to impose personal standards” -spicymayo26

-insists that 100% ‘freedom of speech’ allows for:
“spam bots, off-topic threads, viruses, or inherently harmful things” to be deleted, because they “deserve to be” but…

If people have “100% freedom of speech” then they are ‘free’ to express themselves accordingly, therefore, the means of having a ‘bot’ or ‘off-topic’ comment is apart of their means of expression.

The fundamental basis of your assertion is that you deign exceptions to exist (harmful thing) when they suit you, but then you demand "100%’ of something; those aren’t compatible terms.

If people cannot express “harmful” things, to your ‘standards’ then they don’t have the ‘freedom’ you demand that they should have. If the basis of not allowing some forms of expression is then allowed, then some sort of ‘rule’ will help offer guidelines to make distinctions between stuff following the rule, and stuff that doesn’t.

“censorship” is immoral, but deleting spam bots, and “harmful things” is evidently “not immoral” as you assert such things “deserve to be” so you’re claiming that ‘censorship’ isn’t ‘censorship’ on a basis that suits you, but not the context of the forum environment.

The basis of your concern is that things have to suit a ‘moral standard’ (with what you agree) but then you disregard the code of conduct, which by literal definitions is a ‘moral code’, as not being ‘moral’ enough to suit you; you claim you don’t want to impose your standards, but the metric by which you denounce some things, and permit others, is based on an unwritten standard of which you agree based on an idealized “moral”

But when your conduct doesn’t match with the claim of how to enact that ‘moral’ standard, it creates contradiction. and based on how you line-item respond, disregard formatting cues, revel in willful ignorance, and want to impose a double-standard over a listed one, the basis on how you claim things will lead to a “bad forum” don’t line up with your conduct.

You’re willing to allow some ‘off-topic’ posts in view of what you assert for ‘freedom’, but then won’t allow other things, and then claim people would thus have & need “100% freedom of speech”

Oh, but all of that evidently doesn’t have anything to do with ‘legal rights’

Uh huh.

28

The moderators still haven’t found the disguise of this post?

29

Seems like not enough reports received.

1 Like