Guild Wars 2

Dave.2536:

Olvendred.3027:

Dave.2536:

Dismissing a post based on the person rather than the post?

He explicitly stated he would ignore posts based on their content.

Based on one word? On reasonable presumption of judgment from that single word? I’m not buying that as “content”.

That’s cherrypicking to the extreme. (Should we ban that word too OP?)

You seem to flit from argument to argument a lot. You stated it was “the equivalent of ad hominem” and then aggressively defended that, including by saying he was dismissing it “based on the person rather than the post.” You have now abandoned that argument, in favour of calling it cherrypicking.

Make up your mind.

Oh, and the words in a post are its content. I’m not sure how else you could define the content of a forum post.

Also note that the OP did not suggest banning any words.

The better thing to do is to respond to their post completely ignoring any offensive words in it.

Of course that’s assuming their post had anything worth responding to.

A post like this will not get rid of the usage of the words. Don’t use them yourself and don’t respond to anything that’s obvious flame bait. If more people did that, the people who do that stuff will get bored and move on to another forum.

Any who sign this are not the people who use the words to be intentionally offensive. They’re actually going YAY over this post. Because someone feels their impact is high enough that a campaign to make the forums a nicer place has begun. This post is a reaction to their negativity.

Olvendred.3027:

You seem to flit from argument to argument a lot. You stated it was “the equivalent of ad hominem” and then aggressively defended that, including by saying he was dismissing it “based on the person rather than the post.” You have now abandoned that argument, in favour of calling it cherrypicking.

Make up your mind.

Oh, and the words in a post are its content. I’m not sure how else you could define the content of a forum post.

Also note that the OP did not suggest banning any words.

I abandoned nothing. OP is cherrypicking words to justify dismissing entire posts. Ad hominem is dismissing a post based not on its content but on its writer. I don’t see how going by one single word is anything less than making a judgment on the writer and ignoring the content.

PS: stop taking things too literally, like “ban”. I don’t see how anyone could naturally misinterpret the context of its use (I’ll spell it out for you just in case: “OP, should we throw ‘cherrypick’ into your list as well?”)

Dave.2536:

Olvendred.3027:

You seem to flit from argument to argument a lot. You stated it was “the equivalent of ad hominem” and then aggressively defended that, including by saying he was dismissing it “based on the person rather than the post.” You have now abandoned that argument, in favour of calling it cherrypicking.

Make up your mind.

Oh, and the words in a post are its content. I’m not sure how else you could define the content of a forum post.

Also note that the OP did not suggest banning any words.

I abandoned nothing. OP is cherrypicking words to justify dismissing entire posts. Ad hominem is dismissing a post based not on its content but on its writer. I don’t see how going by one single word is anything less than making a judgment on the writer and ignoring the content.

PS: stop taking things too literally, like “ban”. I don’t see how anyone could naturally misinterpret the context of its use (I’ll spell it out for you just in case: “OP, should we throw ‘cherrypick’ into your list as well?”)

Okay, as I previously indicated, I’m talking about ignoring posts that contain ad hominem attacks, containing those specific words I listed. I understand that wasn’t clear in my initial post, but it should be clear now, yes? Can we agree that what I am proposing is not the same thing as an ad hominem attack?

Guhracie.3419:

Okay, as I previously indicated, I’m talking about ignoring posts that contain ad hominem attacks, containing those specific words I listed. I understand that wasn’t clear in my initial post, but it should be clear now, yes? Can we agree that what I am proposing is not the same thing as an ad hominem attack?

If you’re proposing to ignore posts that contain ad hominem attacks, that’s fine. But you seem to be going by the presumption that every use of any of those words in the “list” (which itself seems to be controvertial in this thread) is itself an ad hominem.

Most people are okay with the first part. The controversy is that you seem to believe in the second.

Either way, perhaps a clarification of your OP is in order.

Dave.2536:

Guhracie.3419:

Okay, as I previously indicated, I’m talking about ignoring posts that contain ad hominem attacks, containing those specific words I listed. I understand that wasn’t clear in my initial post, but it should be clear now, yes? Can we agree that what I am proposing is not the same thing as an ad hominem attack?

If you’re proposing to ignore posts that contain ad hominem attacks, that’s fine. But you seem to be going by the presumption that every use of any of those words in the “list” (which itself seems to be controvertial in this thread) is itself an ad hominem.

Most people are okay with the first part. The controversy is that you seem to believe in the second.

Either way, perhaps a clarification of your OP is in order.

Would you care to suggest how my current clarification is lacking? I’m just not sure how I can make:

I’m also not saying that these words are ignored without context, I’m saying that when they’re slung around as slurs, I’m not going to engage with that post.

indicate what you’re suggesting more clearly.

I don’t personally mind being called a White Knight, because white knights are traditionally forces of good. Calling me someone who’s doing good doesn’t amount as much of an insult to me.

The interesting bit is how people try to use it to discredit people. They’re saying if I complain and you defend, I’m obviously more discerning than you, because I’m complaining. I see the flaws in the product.

So when old people complain about that new music, and you defend it, it makes you a white knight and them automatically right. Because obviously if you’re complaining you must be right.

It’s an inane conclusion to draw.

Sometimes something can be fine, even if you don’t like it.

Vayne.8563:

Sometimes something can be fine, even if you don’t like it.

This is gold. Absolutely agree. I would almost be inclined to replace sometimes with almost always because everything, no matter how generally disliked, has some people who enjoy it. I say almost because obviously a commercial product has to appeal to enough people to be viable. As much as not being liked does not mean that it isnt fine, not being liked by a sufficient number of people may not be financially fine.

Guhracie.3419:

Would you care to suggest how my current clarification is lacking? I’m just not sure how I can make:

I’m also not saying that these words are ignored without context, I’m saying that when they’re slung around as slurs, I’m not going to engage with that post.

indicate what you’re suggesting more clearly.

Well I was not aware of the clarification at the time of my initial post (the one I referenced was something you had stated midway).

While what you have now is clearly better than nothing, I am confused at your initial and current motive now.

• If your main point was that posts with ad hominems should be ignored, your “list” of buzzwords has little place in your initial post other than as trollbait.

• Because you still have this “list” in your post, it is unclear whether or not you believe the mere presence of one of these words is enough to conclude a post is ad hominem.

• If this mere presence of a word is not ad hominem, and the purpose of your post is more about ad hominems, what is the purpose of your “list” that has seemingly stirred up considerable controversy of its own?

• (my personal thoughts) It appears to me that you did originally intend to be dismissive of the words in the list themselves, and your current clarification/stance is somewhat of a backtrack after taking lot of (justified) heat.

I simultaneously admire the desire to reduce personal attacks on the forums and think that this thread is likely to do more harm than good.

Ashen.2907:

I simultaneously admire the desire to reduce personal attacks on the forums and think that this thread is likely to do more harm than good.

Its not the thread that is harmful, its the people who felt they had to respond in order to defend either their desire to insult people or their desire to apply labels to people they don’t even know.

On forums, I rarely actually know the posters so it would be silly for me to try to label them based only on the words they write on the forums. They have whole other lives that they live outside the forums, how would it make sense for me to label them on this tiny portion? That’s like you happen to witness a person tripping and you decide to say “that’s a clumsy person” based on that tiny sample of their life.

Djinn.9245:

Ashen.2907:

I simultaneously admire the desire to reduce personal attacks on the forums and think that this thread is likely to do more harm than good.

Its not the thread that is harmful, its the people who felt they had to respond in order to defend either their desire to insult people or their desire to apply labels to people they don’t even know.

On forums, I rarely actually know the posters so it would be silly for me to try to label them based only on the words they write on the forums. They have whole other lives that they live outside the forums, how would it make sense for me to label them on this tiny portion? That’s like you happen to witness a person tripping and you decide to say “that’s a clumsy person” based on that tiny sample of their life.

To clarify, i am not saying that I believe that the OP is likely to do more harm than good. I think that the intentions expressed are laudable.

A thread is comprised of its constituent posts. The pattern in this one does not seem positive to me.

As to labels, I suppose it depends on the circumstances. If I am complaining and someone refers to me as a complainer (one who is complaining) then they are accurately describing me in that thread. I certainly do not, would not, take that as an insult.

Of course all too often labels are used to marginalize or insult those with whom one disagrees. In such a situation they are a detriment to civil discourse and should be avoided.

For the most part I agree with you and the OP, I just prefer to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Ashen.2907:

Djinn.9245:

Ashen.2907:

I simultaneously admire the desire to reduce personal attacks on the forums and think that this thread is likely to do more harm than good.

Its not the thread that is harmful, its the people who felt they had to respond in order to defend either their desire to insult people or their desire to apply labels to people they don’t even know.

On forums, I rarely actually know the posters so it would be silly for me to try to label them based only on the words they write on the forums. They have whole other lives that they live outside the forums, how would it make sense for me to label them on this tiny portion? That’s like you happen to witness a person tripping and you decide to say “that’s a clumsy person” based on that tiny sample of their life.

To clarify, i am not saying that I believe that the OP is likely to do more harm than good. I think that the intentions expressed are laudable.

A thread is comprised of its constituent posts. The pattern in this one does not seem positive to me.

As to labels, I suppose it depends on the circumstances. If I am complaining and someone refers to me as a complainer (one who is complaining) then they are accurately describing me in that thread. I certainly do not, would not, take that as an insult.

The problem is that there is no benefit to labeling a person based on one thread. What you are really talking about is their words in that instance, not the person himself. So what is the point of labeling the person instead of their words?

Gaile Gray.6029:

As I see it, and I have been actively reading the post, Guhracie had noble intentions in posting this and he offered a personal position on the use of inflammatory words when they are (mis)used in specific ways.

This shouldn’t have devolved into the snarkfest it has become. This isn’t a semantics debate. It’s not the platform for someone to mock, insult, and abuse other forum members because he/she disagrees with the position stated. It’s a personal position and you’re welcome to join in, or not. But arguing with the stated position it is like arguing with someone because you like salmon and they do not. There’s not “right” or “wrong” for it’s a personal opinion. Just as “I don’t intend to participate in certain threads” is a personal choice.

When one thread had more than half a dozen warranted reports and more that could have been made, well, obviously there’s a problem. In this case, the problem seems to be not with the original post but with forum members who are unwilling or unable to remain quiet on a subject that does not require or benefit from their input.

Please don’t post if you’re being argumentative, insulting, or pedantic. Please feel free to move to the next thread and contribute where you have a contribution to make and leave this thread for those who wish to join in the pledge or discuss the parameters of the pledge in a respectful and contributing manner.

Thank you for this, Ms. Gray, and your follow-up is spot on. “I’m out!” rather than “I hope toads eat your face!”

Gaile Gray.6029:

Djinn — do you sense Guhracie is “labeling?” He mentions his position was to not participate when certain words are used as a slur. If you feel he’s making his personal choice too hurriedly, it’s a harmless choice, as he is choosing not to participate. He’s not saying he’ll get into the thread and flame the forum member, or that he’ll report and hope they get smited by all the powers of The Six Gods. He’s just saying “If someone uses slurs, I’m out.”

Or do you see it differently?

I completely agree with Guhracie and said so shortly after the OP. In my post above yours here, I’m speaking about the various people who replied to the OP defending their right to negatively label (slur) – especially those thinking it is fine to call someone a “complainer” if they had a post(s) in which they were complaining.

Guhracie.3419:

I, Guhracie.3419, do pledge that I will not make use of the petty and demeaning go-to forum slurs. I also pledge that I will immediately disregard the entirety of any post making active use of these slurs, even if the overall opinion is in keeping with my own views. Henceforth, the following ad hominim attacks (and any variation thereof) will be ignored (and not used) by me:
White knight
troll
shill
haters
whiners
complainers
entitled
toxic
QQ

Please feel free to add to this list, and I will keep it updated with my own personal pledge. Feel free to modify the pledge in any way you’d like, as long as it’s in keeping with the whole theme of making the forum a more positive place to be. Let’s do a little self moderation, folks.

EDIT: To add a few I agree with. I’m also not saying that these words are ignored without context, I’m saying that when they’re slung around as slurs, I’m not going to engage with that post.

Your list misses my old antiword of the last years : “fanboy”

But ok .. maybe because “white knight” is now hipper. What makes me wonder
if i can call people that say “white knight” now hipsters ?

Djinn.9245:

Gaile Gray.6029:

Djinn — do you sense Guhracie is “labeling?” He mentions his position was to not participate when certain words are used as a slur. If you feel he’s making his personal choice too hurriedly, it’s a harmless choice, as he is choosing not to participate. He’s not saying he’ll get into the thread and flame the forum member, or that he’ll report and hope they get smited by all the powers of The Six Gods. He’s just saying “If someone uses slurs, I’m out.”

Or do you see it differently?

I completely agree with Guhracie and said so shortly after the OP. In my post above yours here, I’m speaking about the various people kittenponded to the OP defending their right to negatively label (slur) – especially those thinking it is fine to call someone a “complainer” if they had a post(s) in which they were complaining.

Complainer is not necessarily a slur, unless you consider voicing a complaint to be a bad thing I suppose. It means one who is complaining. It is an accurate description of behavior. Were it to be carried beyond current activity, or used dismissively, then
It might very well be intended as a slur.

Is refering to someone participating on these forums as a forum goer or poster a slur ? How about player in the context of a GW2 player ? Customer ? All labels.

Gaile Gray.6029:

In this case, the problem seems to be not with the original post but with forum members who are unwilling or unable to remain quiet on a subject that does not require or benefit from their input.

For the WIN!!!!!!

This sums up about 90% of the threads around here and that number dropped substantially since you got rid of the BLTP forum…RIP.

On topic: good for you for deciding on being nice, but ignoring posts with random subjectively offensive words will not help you come to a full understanding of various subjects discussed. Many a truth is told in Troll…

Many things said in troll are often used as attacks. What truth they contain are often colored and burried in order to push like minded viewers into a direction agree with them. And pushing otherminded people into coming into conflict with them.

That last part is the issue. Trollish (probably what im gonna call it from now on) isn’t about actually communicating with people of opposing views. Its only about getting a rise out of people with opposing views. The people that use it dont bother trying to think about how what they say will push the discussion forward. They only want to get a reaction out of people. In doing so. They do more harm than good with what could otherwise be an actually constructive statement.

I PERSONALLY have no problems with people discussing or even arguing over something they feel strongly with. Because the related parties are trying to find out which viewpoint is actually correct. My problem is when people argue a point for hte purpose of argueing the point or insulting the poster of that point. Because those people have no desire to actually see the discussion go anywhere..or if they do its dwarfed by there desire for the cheap thrill of making someone angry.

It’s complainer, or more specifically serial complainer, if you’ve never seen a particular poster say anything positive about the game. Or if he/she posts their two line bit about how X sucks in every single thread in the last two weeks that marginally had anything to do with X.

That is hardly constructive and can easily lump them in with the guy at the street corner on the soap box wearing the sign saying “The End is Nigh”. It doesn’t add to the discussion and make the poster seems like a crackpot.

Ashen.2907:

Djinn.9245:

Gaile Gray.6029:

Djinn — do you sense Guhracie is “labeling?” He mentions his position was to not participate when certain words are used as a slur. If you feel he’s making his personal choice too hurriedly, it’s a harmless choice, as he is choosing not to participate. He’s not saying he’ll get into the thread and flame the forum member, or that he’ll report and hope they get smited by all the powers of The Six Gods. He’s just saying “If someone uses slurs, I’m out.”

Or do you see it differently?

I completely agree with Guhracie and said so shortly after the OP. In my post above yours here, I’m speaking about the various people kittenponded to the OP defending their right to negatively label (slur) – especially those thinking it is fine to call someone a “complainer” if they had a post(s) in which they were complaining.

Complainer is not necessarily a slur, unless you consider voicing a complaint to be a bad thing I suppose. It means one who is complaining. It is an accurate description of behavior. Were it to be carried beyond current activity, or used dismissively, then
It might very well be intended as a slur.

Is refering to someone participating on these forums as a forum goer or poster a slur ? How about player in the context of a GW2 player ? Customer ? All labels.

And there’s an important thing that we haven’t really gone over (and is mostly being ignored). Its not just the label, its the context for how the label is used. Calling someone a complainer because they are annoyed at something isn’t inherently bad, But this (just an example)…..

Just another Complainer. Ignore her and carry on people!

is definitely a slur of sorts.

People need to look for how the word is used. Just looking for the keyword or key phrase, then immediately dismissing an entire post because of it isn’t really the right way to go about things.

Context is important, and should be taken into consideration.

On forums, intentions are never clear.

For example, if I were a QQ, toxic, hating, trolling, whining, complaining, entitled, white-knighting shill, such a thread, if successful, would make me immune to criticism on the forums.

I prefer the freedom to call things as I see ’em. That said, I will try not to abuse terms and definitions.

It’s OK. I’m sure when these new forum “specialist” moderators are hired things will be a lot more nice around here and nobody will ever have to worry about being slandered again.

Charrbeque.8729:

It’s OK. I’m sure when these new forum “specialist” moderators are hired things will be a lot more nice around here and nobody will ever have to worry about being slandered again.

A couple of misconceptions there.

Gaile Gray (Source)
ArenaNet Forum Communications Team Lead

“Here are some answers to question about the Forum Specialist Program:

No forum specialist will be a moderator. No FS will have moderation rights or back-end forum access of any kind. They will not infract, suspend, or ban any forum member — ever. Forum specialists will be able to flag points — as any member can and should do — and we hope they will do that actively. But each flag will be reviewed impartially and acted upon only by staff members and only if the flagged post or thread is in breach of the UA, RoC, Naming Policy, or FCoC.

We expect applicants to have a decent, but not necessarily perfect, forum and game history. We would not dismiss an application simply because someone received an infraction for speaking in the heat of the moment or making a joke to which someone reacted negatively. We will review game and forum account history on a case-by-case basis. Naturally, someone with a long list of forum infractions or someone with a sketchy game history is is not a likely candidate.

Forum specialists will not asked to muzzle their opinions. These will be highly involved forum members, and their opinions and insights are valuable. We will encourage specialists to link to official threads for official information and offer their personal opinions clearly as opinions.

We will not limit our selections to cheerleaders and “white hats.” Communication style is key. Offering constructive ideas for change is good; complaining is not. Expressing opinions is fine; expressing opinions as fact is not. Interacting positively is good; condemning, dismissive, or condescending communication is not.

This is a pilot program. We hope to be able to expand it outside the U.S. in the future, but there are legal reasons for the limitation right now."

Ashen.2907:

Djinn.9245:

Gaile Gray.6029:

Djinn — do you sense Guhracie is “labeling?” He mentions his position was to not participate when certain words are used as a slur. If you feel he’s making his personal choice too hurriedly, it’s a harmless choice, as he is choosing not to participate. He’s not saying he’ll get into the thread and flame the forum member, or that he’ll report and hope they get smited by all the powers of The Six Gods. He’s just saying “If someone uses slurs, I’m out.”

Or do you see it differently?

I completely agree with Guhracie and said so shortly after the OP. In my post above yours here, I’m speaking about the various people kittenponded to the OP defending their right to negatively label (slur) – especially those thinking it is fine to call someone a “complainer” if they had a post(s) in which they were complaining.

Complainer is not necessarily a slur, unless you consider voicing a complaint to be a bad thing I suppose. It means one who is complaining. It is an accurate description of behavior. Were it to be carried beyond current activity, or used dismissively, then
It might very well be intended as a slur.

Is refering to someone participating on these forums as a forum goer or poster a slur ? How about player in the context of a GW2 player ? Customer ? All labels.

What is the point of calling someone that name? That is the point. You can say “I’m just calling it as I see it”. Do you call people fat when you see them? No, there is no point in trying to label people as “being” something that they happen to do just when you are watching. That isn’t “what they are”.

Djinn.9245:

Ashen.2907:

Djinn.9245:

Gaile Gray.6029:

Djinn — do you sense Guhracie is “labeling?” He mentions his position was to not participate when certain words are used as a slur. If you feel he’s making his personal choice too hurriedly, it’s a harmless choice, as he is choosing not to participate. He’s not saying he’ll get into the thread and flame the forum member, or that he’ll report and hope they get smited by all the powers of The Six Gods. He’s just saying “If someone uses slurs, I’m out.”

Or do you see it differently?

I completely agree with Guhracie and said so shortly after the OP. In my post above yours here, I’m speaking about the various people kittenponded to the OP defending their right to negatively label (slur) – especially those thinking it is fine to call someone a “complainer” if they had a post(s) in which they were complaining.

Complainer is not necessarily a slur, unless you consider voicing a complaint to be a bad thing I suppose. It means one who is complaining. It is an accurate description of behavior. Were it to be carried beyond current activity, or used dismissively, then
It might very well be intended as a slur.

Is refering to someone participating on these forums as a forum goer or poster a slur ? How about player in the context of a GW2 player ? Customer ? All labels.

What is the point of calling someone that name? That is the point. You can say “I’m just calling it as I see it”. Do you call people fat when you see them? No, there is no point in trying to label people as “being” something that they happen to do just when you are watching. That isn’t “what they are”.

The problem is too many people use names to try to dismiss people’s arguments. I’ve not only been called a fan boy, I’ve been called a mindless one. I can assure you, I have a mind. It even functions from time to time. lol

Guhracie.3419:

I, Guhracie.3419, do pledge that I will not make use of the petty and demeaning go-to forum slurs. I also pledge that I will immediately disregard the entirety of any post making active use of these slurs, even if the overall opinion is in keeping with my own views. Henceforth, the following ad hominim attacks (and any variation thereof) will be ignored (and not used) by me:
White knight
fanboy
troll
shill
haters
whiners
complainers
entitled
toxic
QQ

Please feel free to add to this list, and I will keep it updated with my own personal pledge. Feel free to modify the pledge in any way you’d like, as long as it’s in keeping with the whole theme of making the forum a more positive place to be. Let’s do a little self moderation, folks.

EDIT: To add a few I agree with. I’m also not saying that these words are ignored without context, I’m saying that when they’re slung around as slurs, I’m not going to engage with that post.

p.s. ‘toxic’ as an expression to describe a hostile forum environment largely originated and was initially isolated to Anet forum posters. Later on, it became subject to (ab)use by the burning and die-hard supporters of the company (does that count as circumventing your ‘filter’ btw?), which is when it turned into a kind of a buzz word.

Interesting and noble post OP. The way I see it if people use white knight or hater etc its because they don’t really have anything of weight to say so they will try and dismiss the person. I normally don’t use those term too often but I have in the past so i might have to think a bit more before posting because I am adding to the problem. But sadly at the same time some people just like confrontation (normally only when behind a screen a keyboard never IRL) so their isn’t much we as forum members can do thats up to ANET to discard those types of minds because they truly are weak individuals. For me if your strong you raise yourself without brining anyone else down if your weak you try and bring others down because you don’t see yourself at their level.

Djinn.9245:

Ashen.2907:

Djinn.9245:

Gaile Gray.6029:

Djinn — do you sense Guhracie is “labeling?” He mentions his position was to not participate when certain words are used as a slur. If you feel he’s making his personal choice too hurriedly, it’s a harmless choice, as he is choosing not to participate. He’s not saying he’ll get into the thread and flame the forum member, or that he’ll report and hope they get smited by all the powers of The Six Gods. He’s just saying “If someone uses slurs, I’m out.”

Or do you see it differently?

I completely agree with Guhracie and said so shortly after the OP. In my post above yours here, I’m speaking about the various people kittenponded to the OP defending their right to negatively label (slur) – especially those thinking it is fine to call someone a “complainer” if they had a post(s) in which they were complaining.

Complainer is not necessarily a slur, unless you consider voicing a complaint to be a bad thing I suppose. It means one who is complaining. It is an accurate description of behavior. Were it to be carried beyond current activity, or used dismissively, then
It might very well be intended as a slur.

Is refering to someone participating on these forums as a forum goer or poster a slur ? How about player in the context of a GW2 player ? Customer ? All labels.

What is the point of calling someone that name? That is the point. You can say “I’m just calling it as I see it”. Do you call people fat when you see them? No, there is no point in trying to label people as “being” something that they happen to do just when you are watching. That isn’t “what they are”.

Actually yes it is what they are, or at least at that moment. Someone who is walking IS a pedestrian. At some other point they may be a driver instead. Someone who plays GW2 is a player, though at some later point they may not be.

I am not, “calling it as I see it,” because I am not making a value judgement of any sort. Remember that in my example I was the complainer, IE one who was complaining. For example:

Several people (lets say twenty), myself included, are complaining about feature X. A similar number of people are praising feature X. Someone else wants to better understand why we, as a group, are dissatisfied with feature X asks, “what about feature X makes you complainers unhappy?” He could have replaced complainer with twenty user names. He could have used, “those who are expressing dissatisfaction.” And so on. Of course replacing one word with twenty or five is cumbersome and complainer is no more offensive as it means exactly the same thing.

For what its worth OP is a label. Why is one accurate/descriptive label appropriate (when you use it) and another not ?

I pledge to never again use terms regarding bodily functions as a sarcastic response no matter how much I have had to drink on a given night.

Oldirtbeard.9834:

no matter how much I have had to drink on a given night.

Making promises that you can’t keep ?

I kid : )

Oldirtbeard.9834:

I pledge to never again use terms regarding bodily functions as a sarcastic response no matter how much I have had to drink on a given night.

Water makes you sarcastic? O.o

J/k

Except the occasional remark where others provoke me I’ll try to keep sarcasm to a dull roar. (Best I can do, sorry).

Te op may be good, but I ignored it cause you know, slurs.

My litmus test? I imagine saying what I want to say to my departed mother. If I think she’d be OK with it, I’m good. If she’d give me that look, I’d better not. Mom could have given Miss Manners lessons.

IndigoSundown.5419:

My litmus test? I imagine saying what I want to say to my departed mother. If I think she’d be OK with it, I’m good. If she’d give me that look, I’d better not. Mom could have given Miss Manners lessons.

If I used that criteria, I’d be banned in about 3 days. lol

I can see the merit in avoiding labels that people have strongly implanted emotional responses to, but the list seems a bit too extensive to the point that it seems to border on willfully ignoring discourse.

The word ‘entitled’ is a particularly strange word to avoid I think. Would someone being rude label the word “rude” as a slur just because they didn’t want to admit their behavior was a problem?

I can only see the word “entitled” being labeled as a slur by someone who was feeling they deserved something more than what they earned. If the Internet has deemed the word “entitled” a slur then I’m glad I avoid interacting with most netizens. :P

Other than the word “entitled” the list is a relatively sound collection of words to avoid in discourse. Many of them cause readers to shut the door to constructive communication.

Maybe he meant a pair of neurons.

(Hint for the mods: It’s a joke. It’s not a real opinion. )

Zera Allimatti.2541:

Vayne.8563:

LucosTheDutch.4819:

I don’t see why this thread even exists. This has nothing to do with Guild Wars 2 and shouldn’t even be in ‘Guild Wars 2 Discussion’.

This thread also achieves nothing and I wonder if the OP thinks he’s some kind of special snowflake (<- yeah, add that to your list if you want, I don’t care) that his “pledge” deserves a thread.

Not to mention the words that are on the OP’s list. “Toxic” and “complainer” are on there? Really? My advice to the OP would be to grow a pair.

No seriously, grow a pair.

Thank you for illustrating the need for this thread. In one post you accomplished more to forward the cause of this thread than any of the people who support it.

He does have a point though. That guy’s pledge is a personal choice that he is kind of imposing on the rest of the forum. ‘Personal’ pledges like these are supposed to be personal, not public. Of course, no one is expected or required to take in that personal choice. More power to people that try to not be ‘rude’, but honestly, everything that is ever said, done, or thought about is offensive to someone somewhere. For example, simple and non-vulgar words like ‘complain’ are being considered offensive now. That is not ok. One norm is offensive somewhere else, and vice versa. It is impossible to be non-offensive to everyone, so stop trying.

1] in no way does the OP or any other forum user (who is not a moderator or administrator or the like) have the ability to enforce any such pledge on others.

2] personal does not mean secret. personal (as it relates to the pledge) means that the person making the pledge will not hold anyone else to it, unless they ask him to hold them to it.

informing the public of the personal pledge is not an act of “forcing others to make the same pledge,” but rather a public statement given for accountability.

in other words, if the OP keeps the personal pledge a secret, then the pledge is a lot easier to break. but if the OP makes the pledge public, then others can pledge to help him keep his pledge, if they choose so out of their own free will.

PS, my use of the male gender pronoun follows the common practice of using the singular male gender pronoun as a singular gender neutral pronoun. the word “they” is a plural gender neutral pronoun, and i used it incorrectly above (paired with the singular gender neutral pronoun “anyone else”) simply to differentiate between the the OP and “anyone else.”

3] there is a difference between accidentally offending someone and intentionally offending someone. the OP is clearly stating that he will not condone or respond to forum posts that are obviously INTENTIONALLY offending someone.

there is a difference between saying “All those jerks complain about everything.” and saying “there’s been a lot of heated discussion lately.”

the first of those statements is name calling, and name calling is an intention choice to slur someone, sometimes with the intention of angering the recipient of the name being called. that is the very definition of intentionally offending someone.

the second of those statements simply states that heated discussion exists, without condemning nor condoning the discussion nor those participating in the discussion.

4] i disagree with the stance of “everything you say is going to offend someone, so you might as well offend everyone on purpose to begin with.”

angry people tend to do many destructive things, and pushing people into anger, and then pushing them so far into anger that they start damaging things or hurting people is not a good thing. it very easily leads to fist fights, divorces, shootings and stabbings, etc…

Astral Projections.7320:

Charrbeque.8729:

It’s OK. I’m sure when these new forum “specialist” moderators are hired things will be a lot more nice around here and nobody will ever have to worry about being slandered again.

A couple of misconceptions there.

Gaile Gray (Source)
ArenaNet Forum Communications Team Lead

“Here are some answers to question about the Forum Specialist Program:

No forum specialist will be a moderator. No FS will have moderation rights or back-end forum access of any kind. They will not infract, suspend, or ban any forum member — ever. Forum specialists will be able to flag points — as any member can and should do — and we hope they will do that actively. But each flag will be reviewed impartially and acted upon only by staff members and only if the flagged post or thread is in breach of the UA, RoC, Naming Policy, or FCoC.

We expect applicants to have a decent, but not necessarily perfect, forum and game history. We would not dismiss an application simply because someone received an infraction for speaking in the heat of the moment or making a joke to which someone reacted negatively. We will review game and forum account history on a case-by-case basis. Naturally, someone with a long list of forum infractions or someone with a sketchy game history is is not a likely candidate.

Forum specialists will not asked to muzzle their opinions. These will be highly involved forum members, and their opinions and insights are valuable. We will encourage specialists to link to official threads for official information and offer their personal opinions clearly as opinions.

We will not limit our selections to cheerleaders and “white hats.” Communication style is key. Offering constructive ideas for change is good; complaining is not. Expressing opinions is fine; expressing opinions as fact is not. Interacting positively is good; condemning, dismissive, or condescending communication is not.

This is a pilot program. We hope to be able to expand it outside the U.S. in the future, but there are legal reasons for the limitation right now."

Yes. I’m aware they won’t have any kind of moderator powers. I was referring to the fact they will be expected to keep an eye out for posts that violate the rules. “Forum specialists will be able to flag points — as any member can and should do — and we hope they will do that actively.”

Depending on how many specialists there are and who end up being one, we could end up with a lot more posts moderated because of them. I was making a sarcastic joke about it.

Do we really need a thread saying “come on guys, be nice”? Seriously. If you think a post might be against the rules then flag it. It’s that simple. No need to create a thread whining about some words people use. If such words become too much of a problem (i.e. having a lot of posts flagged because of them) then ArenaNet will do something about it such as making an announcement not to use those words in a rude manner or adding them to the kitten profanity filter.

I read the original request to flag posts as not flagging for moderation but flagging for attention because the specialist thought it’s an interesting discussion.

I think currently there are enough volunteer forum police as it is.

Commendable.

Gaile Gray.6029:

Djinn — do you sense Guhracie is “labeling?” He mentions his position was to not participate when certain words are used as a slur. If you feel he’s making his personal choice too hurriedly, it’s a harmless choice, as he is choosing not to participate. He’s not saying he’ll get into the thread and flame the forum member, or that he’ll report and hope they get smited by all the powers of The Six Gods. He’s just saying “If someone uses slurs, I’m out.”

Or do you see it differently?

While I’m not Djinn and your quote pulled here is addressed to him or her, it looked a lot to me like a polemic based on a position of ultimatum. There is no debate invited or welcomed by the OP’s position – in fact, off the cuff of my own sleeve, I wouldn’t feel that any were likely to be tolerated when it came to the OP’s statements and declarations.

Taking a figurative stand like this seems to me to accomplish little except making one’s self a target for lots of thrown verbal tomatoes. If the OP really cared to instigate thought towards a matter and not just draw a line in the sand, seeming (to me) to challenge anyone and anything that didn’t agree?

If that’s what the OP wanted to do, I’d say he or she succeeded. If attempting much else…maybe not so much.

No a figurative stand is saying “I vow not to hire undocumented workers.” when in fact you don’t hire anyone ever, making the pledge meaningless.

The OP is a frequent enough poster and is willing to curtail his posts in threads that include “name calling” to dismiss other player’s arguments and is simply asking other frequent posters to do the same. All in the name to facilitate an actual discussion rather than lobbing dismissive names at one another when the other side is wining the point.

can this thread be locked? All it is is people arguing over semantics and being asses

Freedom of speech yields better things than purely dignified and otherwise reserved conversation. Considering we have to pick our battles in life, I highly recommend you chose better than this one.

Edit – For the record, I too get very annoyed when people criticize your character, grasp on grammar or motives for posting instead of just debating the point you were trying to make. But its really up to them if they want to be engaged and meaningful or not. It’s there choice. Their life. Don’t worry about it. So long as they don’t break any rules or infringe on anyone’s personal rights, it’s their right!

Guhracie.3419:

I, Guhracie.3419, do pledge that I will not make use of the petty and demeaning go-to forum slurs. I also pledge that I will immediately disregard the entirety of any post making active use of these slurs, even if the overall opinion is in keeping with my own views. Henceforth, the following ad hominim attacks (and any variation thereof) will be ignored (and not used) by me:
White knight
fanboy
troll
shill
haters
whiners
complainers
entitled
toxic
QQ

Please feel free to add to this list, and I will keep it updated with my own personal pledge. Feel free to modify the pledge in any way you’d like, as long as it’s in keeping with the whole theme of making the forum a more positive place to be. Let’s do a little self moderation, folks.

EDIT: To add a few I agree with. I’m also not saying that these words are ignored without context, I’m saying that when they’re slung around as slurs, I’m not going to engage with that post.

You are some kind of white knight fanboy, who trolling these forums with this post, and is a shill for haters of complainers and whiners, that feels entitled to how words can be used, you are toxic to these forums, QQ more.

=D, haha, I couldn’t resist. Don’t take what I said above seriously. =P

But yeah, I agree with what you stated.

Yes, because if anything will improve the signal/noise ratio, it’s these self-righteous “pledge” posts that somehow became a thing. /golfclap

Sturgeon’s Law applies to everything.

I agree in principle, but I also believe white knights should be called out for what they are.

Anyway, if you stop using one word another will eventually just take its place. What you should be trying to tackle instead is the atmosphere of the forum, a much harder task. Those people who will not listen to reason or that make a point of arguing other peoples personal opinion because it contradicts their own view of the world.