General Chat

[curulz]

The reason why people followed Hitler was because they lacked critical thinking. I feel the same way about religion. Believing everything something or someone says without question in my eyes can't really point towards anything other than that. Imo.

Sorry if that offends anyone, obviously I'm not stopping those who are religious to stop believing in whatever they believe in. My opinion is just what is it.

 

You gave an example earlier how you shouldn't use a derogatory slur to a homosexual man, but saying that religious people lack critical thinking. Is that two sides of the same coin? Both can be offensive.

[Tsillah]

The reason why people followed Hitler was because they lacked critical thinking.

Well the lack of critical thinking is what I was talking about, but I don't think that's solved with censorship or pushing topics into a taboo atmosphere.

 

Overall I think this is a topic for the community to address more than Bioware as rule maker.

[psandak]

That is not accurate, the amendment is far more encompassing then just restricting the government.

 

Maybe it has been interpreted that way, but what I quote are the EXACT words from the Constitution.

[Tsillah]

You gave an example earlier how you shouldn't use a derogatory slur to a homosexual man, but saying that religious people lack critical thinking. Is that two sides of the same coin? Both can be offensive.

 

I see what you mean there but there are a couple of noteworthy differences between the two.

 

First of all, sexual preference is something you are born with, it's not a choice. Your religious preference is a choice. That's a significant difference.

 

Secondly, derogatory slurs are not the same as thinking someone lacks critical thinking. People can be offended by both but whereas derogatory slurs are intended to hurt and inflame, the comment on lack of critical thinking could be just an observation. Now it may be subjective and even judgemental, but we also make judgements about what people look like or what music they listen to. I do think there is such a thing as being too easily offended.

 

Now between the two examples you mention I do agree that the line I draw is perhaps a fine one, but on the other hand I honestly am ok with someone having an opinion no matter how wrong I think it is, but using derogatory slurs goes well beyond that. So I wouldn't say they are two sides of the same coin.

[Kawiki]

 

I'm not familiar with the Cleveland Indians and the history behind it so I'm not sure what to say. There wont ever be perfection and you can't make everyone equally happy. From my uninformed point of view, I don't see why a small group of people shouldn't be allowed to keep their name, but then again I don't know much about it.

 

 

The Cleveland Indians are a baseball team. Some American Indians feel the naming a baseball team after their race is offensive.

[Eshvara]

I see what you mean there but there are a couple of noteworthy differences between the two.

 

First of all, sexual preference is something you are born with, it's not a choice. Your religious preference is a choice. That's a significant difference.

 

Secondly, derogatory slurs are not the same as thinking someone lacks critical thinking. People can be offended by both but whereas derogatory slurs are intended to hurt and inflame, the comment on lack of critical thinking could be just an observation. Now it may be subjective and even judgemental, but we also make judgements about what people look like or what music they listen to. I do think there is such a thing as being too easily offended.

 

Now between the two examples you mention I do agree that the line I draw is perhaps a fine one, but on the other hand I honestly am ok with someone having an opinion no matter how wrong I think it is, but using derogatory slurs goes well beyond that. So I wouldn't say they are two sides of the same coin.

 

You gave an example earlier how you shouldn't use a derogatory slur to a homosexual man, but saying that religious people lack critical thinking. Is that two sides of the same coin? Both can be offensive.

I couldn't really have said it better than Tsillah.

 

 

The Cleveland Indians are a baseball team. Some American Indians feel the naming a baseball team after their race is offensive.

 

Right, I'm not from the US so I wasn't aware of it being a sports team. If they should be able to keep their name, I personally don't see why not, it's not like they're using it in a negative way. But people are often sensitive about these things. I honestly wouldn't know what the best solution would be.

Edited December 29, 2016 by Eshvara

[Anzel]

The Cleveland Indians are a baseball team. Some American Indians feel the naming a baseball team after their race is offensive.

 

What about the New York Mets? Are people that live in Metropolitan areas offended? Never mind, LOL I'm certain that they are... of something... every day of their tiny little lives.

[Kawiki]

Right, I'm not from the US so I wasn't aware of it being a sports team. If they should be able to keep their name, I personally don't see why not, it's not like they're using it in a negative way. But people are often sensitive about these things. I honestly wouldn't know what the best solution would be.

 

Right on. It crushed me when they lost Game 7 of the World Series this year but I digress.

 

Most people would agree with you that it is not offensive. And this goes back to where do we draw the line. If we start censoring or deciding what is right to say or wrong to say it could potentially lead to a slippery slope of anything that is offensive to anyone gets censored or is not allowed.

 

We all should be free to live our lives the way we want without any type of oppression, I think most would agree with that. But with that freedom unfortunately comes the acceptance of others even if they spew hate. It is a catch-22.

[curulz]

I see what you mean there but there are a couple of noteworthy differences between the two.

 

First of all, sexual preference is something you are born with, it's not a choice. Your religious preference is a choice. That's a significant difference.

 

Secondly, derogatory slurs are not the same as thinking someone lacks critical thinking. People can be offended by both but whereas derogatory slurs are intended to hurt and inflame, the comment on lack of critical thinking could be just an observation. Now it may be subjective and even judgemental, but we also make judgements about what people look like or what music they listen to. I do think there is such a thing as being too easily offended.

 

Now between the two examples you mention I do agree that the line I draw is perhaps a fine one, but on the other hand I honestly am ok with someone having an opinion no matter how wrong I think it is, but using derogatory slurs goes well beyond that. So I wouldn't say they are two sides of the same coin.

 

But I believe they are similar enough. He/She thought one was appropriate and the other was not. My point was it is not what YOU consider offensive and inappropriate, but rather the person they are directed to. You're right about the fine line though, which is why it is such a slippery slope.

 

I will agree that slurs vs. generalizations aren't the same in terms of the language used, but the intent is to demean another in some way. The power of the words may not be same, but the intent can be. and to me, the intention is more important than the words used. However I don't think choice vs. "born that way" should factor in at all when it comes to this sort of thing.

[Iffyluse]

Imperial fleet on Red Eclipse general chat is even worse, it's always pvpers calling eachother all kinds of names, people "discussing" politics as if they know what they're talking about (seriously, you get more stupid every line of chat you read) . General chat used to be cool, now it's some sort of 4chan-like cesspool.

 

It's why I casually play on Progenitor sometimes, it seems to have a more civilized crowd there.

[Eshvara]

Imperial fleet on Red Eclipse general chat is even worse, it's always pvpers calling eachother all kinds of names, people "discussing" politics as if they know what they're talking about (seriously, you get more stupid every line of chat you read) . General chat used to be cool, now it's some sort of 4chan-like cesspool.

 

It's why I casually play on Progenitor sometimes, it seems to have a more civilized crowd there.

 

Yeah, the people on the progenitor seem generally nice, apart from the occasional "weird:rak_03:" RP things people recruit for, it's a pretty pleasant server.

Too bad it isn't as easy to do other stuff that don't involve RP there, or so it hasn't in my experience.

[Iffyluse]

Yeah, the people on the progenitor seem generally nice, apart from the occasional "weird:rak_03:" RP things people recruit for, it's a pretty pleasant server.

Too bad it isn't as easy to do other stuff that don't involve RP there, or so it hasn't in my experience.

 

Yeah, I play on Progenitor for the socializing and Red Eclipse for ops/flashpoins with the chat turned off

[DarthEnrique]

It's not a matter of what's ok or not. The reality is that it takes resources to enforce it. If they can't bring out regular content updates outside of story, what chance do we have of them enforcing anything in game chat?

 

Secondly, 99% of the time or more it's trolling. If people would just ignore them and move on instead of replying to them, they would die out, because they're not getting their reactions. But try to get the whole community on the fleet to ignore them. There are always at least a couple of people who bite and these trolls know it.

 

The topics are not ok, but you have to be realistic about what's achievable.

 

This a million times over. For starters, no one is going to pay holiday pay for BW to monitor and ban people over Christmas. It'd also be an enormous job to monitor gen chat from all servers and instances 24/7. It's really impossible. This is why ignore and report exists.

 

And most people are trolling. Someone asked a moronic question in a gen chat. It was something about V and X and if IV was 11. I quickly summed up roman numerals plainly to which they responded about how I must love Trump or some stupid troll bait. I just said ok whatever. Left it at that. They said nothing more to me but another person who thought to school them further on roman numerals took their bait and this whole nasty debate between them ensued. Gen chat on odessen turned real ugly real fast. I switched it off and went about my merry way.

 

I know not everyone plays like I do. If gen chat is repulsive then you can turn off the chat, you can make your own chat channel and remove gen chat but keep other channels like guild chat, or you can ignore the offenders. If you turn off chat, which is my style, you will get a ping when someone whispers you and I get them sometimes when guildies speak after a prolonged silence.

 

I'm on harb and I rarely see anything too awful when chat is active. I don't fleet sit though. I did once read a hilarious chat while doing boring heroics on tatooine between army guys discussing rectal exams. I suspect they scared some poor kid from joining but hey I got to see a friendship form between 3 strangers from different countries. I considered following them to the next planet to keep my heroics somewhat entertaining I didn't though.

 

Seriously, if it bothers you then take steps that BW has given us. Easily done. And whatever you do ****DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS**** unless it's a special person that so richly deserves being trolled back. I think every server has that one special person.

 

But seriously, what's far more concerning than gen chat trolls are dictator like guild leaders who recruit new players then tell them they can't chat etc or they'll be kicked. That's what I worry about most especially where newbies are concerned.

So you guys are saying that EAware is above the law? Sorry but no, there needs to be rules just like there are here on the forum about topics that should NOT be discussed in the public chat of this game, and they need to be same rules that are on this forum, no discussing politics, sex, religion or making discriminatory remarks based on race, sexual orientation, etc. should not be allowed in the general chat of this game and yes it should be policed or immediately dealt with if reported for the protection of all the player base, you are aware that by law if a parent so chooses to press charges against someone in this game for talking sexually in front of their child EAware has to give your information out? They have no right by law to protect you from having charges pressed against you. Same with harassment or sexual harassment, otherwise they can be sued and held liable. There are certain things EAware cannot do and obstructing the law is one of them and they should have policies against certain conversations in their public in-game chat for the protection of all their customers cause here's the sad truth in the United States it doesn't matter if you are aware a person who you are speaking with is a minor or not, whether you knew or not is never a subject you still can be charged and found guilty for it regardless. So EAware should not care about their customers enough to protect them from that by making rules against discussing certain subjects in the general public chat of their game?

 

And on the subject of free speech people need to be aware that because we signed an agreement to the Terms of Service we also removed that right, look at the forum here there are certain topics that are banned from from being discussed so where's your free speech there? It's gone because you have to uphold their rules or lose your privilege to use the forum or have infractions put against you. Why do they have this rule? So there is nothing in this forum that can be found offensive or used against their customers that can push an issue to the point where charges can be pressed, also EAware is looking out for their own behinds so they aren't held liable. Same needs to be applied with the public in-game chat of this game. What you do in a private message, whisper, group chat or guild chat if your guild allows that kind of talk, is the business between you and the people you are talking to in a private conversation, but where everyone can see it? That's a different story and it needs to be addressed.

Edited December 30, 2016 by DarthEnrique

[americanaussie]

So you guys are saying that EAware is above the law? Sorry but no, there needs to be rules just like there are here on the forum about topics that should NOT be discussed in the public chat of this game, and they need to be same rules that are on this forum, no discussing politics, sex, religion or making discriminatory remarks based on race, sexual orientation, etc. should not be allowed in the general chat of this game and yes it should be policed or immediately dealt with if reported for the protection of all the player base, you are aware that by law if a parent so chooses to press charges against someone in this game for talking sexually in front of their child EAware has to give your information out? They have no right by law to protect you from having charges pressed against you. Same with harassment or sexual harassment, otherwise they can be sued and held liable. There are certain things EAware cannot do and obstructing the law is one of them and they should have policies against certain conversations in their public in-game chat for the protection of all their customers cause here's the sad truth in the United States it doesn't matter if you are aware a person who you are speaking with is a minor or not, whether you knew or not is never a subject you still can be charged and found guilty for it regardless. So EAware should not care about their customers enough to protect them from that by making rules against discussing certain subjects in the general public chat of their game?

 

And on the subject of free speech people need to be aware that because we signed an agreement to the Terms of Service we also removed that right, look at the forum here there are certain topics that are banned from from being discussed so where's your free speech there? It's gone because you have to uphold their rules or lose your privilege to use the forum or have infractions put against you. Why do they have this rule? So there is nothing in this forum that can be found offensive or used against their customers that can push an issue to the point where charges can be pressed, also EAware is looking out for their own behinds so they aren't held liable. Same needs to be applied with the public in-game chat of this game. What you do in a private message, whisper, group chat or guild chat if your guild allows that kind of talk, is the business between you and the people you are talking to in a private conversation, but where everyone can see it? That's a different story and it needs to be addressed.

 

Sorry but there is no law that requires 24/7 policing otherwise you wouldn't be able to have a conversation in public without a policeman.

[curulz]

snip.

 

BW is covered from a legal standpoint. BW' is operating within the confines of the law, no more, no less. You may want them to do more, but they are not obligated to do so.

[doelow]

Modern people are still entirely barbaric and unaesthetic. The internet really brings it out. I can't exactly point out the exact moment I realized that people are not innately good, but I'm sure the internet hastened me quickly along in having that realization in life. Mother Nature really can't wipe us out fast enough.

[DarthEnrique]

Sorry but there is no law that requires 24/7 policing otherwise you wouldn't be able to have a conversation in public without a policeman.

BW is covered from a legal standpoint. BW' is operating within the confines of the law, no more, no less. You may want them to do more, but they are not obligated to do so.

No point in arguing with people who are blind to the truth so not going to bother pointing out you can't have a conversation in public without a policeman in this day and age with mobile phones and that while a single police officer may not work 24/7 there is always officers on duty 24/7 otherwise stores like Walmart that are open 24/7 wouldn't be open 24/7 because if there's no police on duty what's to stop someone from getting away with robbing them? And it's not like people can't secretly record things or call the police anytime they want and the police won't come. No point in pointing out my ex is a cop who works at night. No point in arguing with those who will not see.

Edited December 30, 2016 by DarthEnrique

[Tsillah]

But I believe they are similar enough. He/She thought one was appropriate and the other was not. My point was it is not what YOU consider offensive and inappropriate, but rather the person they are directed to. You're right about the fine line though, which is why it is such a slippery slope.

 

I will agree that slurs vs. generalizations aren't the same in terms of the language used, but the intent is to demean another in some way. The power of the words may not be same, but the intent can be. and to me, the intention is more important than the words used. However I don't think choice vs. "born that way" should factor in at all when it comes to this sort of thing.

 

I think it's a big difference to be critical about someone's choices ore something they had no choice in. I also don't think a generalisation like this is in the same corner as derogatory slurs. I do agree it is a generalisation and as such I don't believe it's correct. But I do agree there isn't enough critical thinking going on in this world especially when it comes to religion and politics and that's why I do understand why she made the generalisation, because I do see it a lot. I grew up in a religious home and I've lived in 4 different countries and visited more. That doesn't make me an expert, but so far my experience is that critical thinking is just as rare as a high IQ (mind you those are two very different things. IQ is no guarantee of the ability to be critical).

 

But just because I believe that a lot of people lack critical thinking, doesn't mean it's meant as a derogatory remark. It's an observation to me, but I do also know people who are religious and do have critical notes. Just not that many.

 

So to me the only mistake she made was to make it a generalisation, but that's her belief. Maybe by discussing it she will at some point see that sweeping generalisations are dangerous and tend to be untrue. That's not possible if she had remained quiet.

 

But no, I do not agree that her comments were similar to derogatory slurs. That term is too strong for her personal observation because I do not believe she had the same intent.

[Tsillah]

So you guys are saying that EAware is above the law?

 

Please quote the part where I said that EAware is above the law, because I think you're talking out of your rear end here. My whole point is that they aren't the law and from my point of view they shouldn't be. I never said they're above it.

[Eshvara]

Yeah, I play on Progenitor for the socializing and Red Eclipse for ops/flashpoins with the chat turned off

 

Seems like a good way to keep your sanity.

[DarthEnrique]

Please quote the part where I said that EAware is above the law, because I think you're talking out of your rear end here. My whole point is that they aren't the law and from my point of view they shouldn't be. I never said they're above it.

 

I'm not talking out my rear. Bioware should uphold the laws and that means supplying the resources to enforce their policies and the law. Meaning they need to have people policing the chat. They aren't above the law and need to reenforce it. It's like I keep saying this game has minors (children under 18) in it mixed with adults and talking sexually around them or to them is against the law. Doesn't even matter if you know if someone is a minor or not, many have been unjustly persecuted for not knowing someone was a minor and talking sexually. It's stupid and I won't deny that and I wish it wasn't like that but the law is what it is. You made it sound like they are above the law and should not supply the resources to discourage conversations like that.

Edited December 30, 2016 by DarthEnrique

[Tsillah]

You made it sound like they are above the law and should not supply the resources to discourage conversations like that.

This is the problem. You make false assumptions and then try to hold me responsible for your false assumptions.

 

I never said nor implied that they are above the law. That's a complete fabrication by you.

I also never said that they shouldn't supply resources. I do however say that it will take too many resources to police general chat all over the game and I also think that the community should do this themselves. BWA gave us the option to ignore people and we have the power ourselves to not reply to trolls.

 

Bottom line is that no matter what BWA will try to enforce it, trolls will find some way to come through. The only remedy is people not hitting that reply button.

[Fydgett]

FoS is actually to protect yourself from the government deciding what you say is grounds for charges of treason thus resulting in death. The Supreme Court has upheld that numerous times. They have also classified derogatory/racism speech as Hate Speech, punishable by law. Yelling FIRE in a crowded building/room, when there isn't one, is not FoS, it's being used to cause bodily harm and harass people. EA has the same ability to remove hate speech users as a business does. You're in their building, and you're harassing people using faulty reasoning and making a nuisance of yourself. The reason most businesses don't follow through is simply because those that feel they can behave as such, w/o consequences, (using the FoS fallback) will cause soo much drama it's really not useful and tie up some serious money into litigation. Keep in mind, most local level judges don't subscribe to the hate speech being non-protected speech in a place of business. Hate speech is only protected in certain areas, under certain conditions (*** rallies need to get prior approval so as the local PD can get enough people to keep the bloodshed to a minimum, they can make sure the area is secured enough so bodily harm/riots don't cause death and dismemberment). You can only use public property to spout hate, private property isn't allowed and you can be removed forcibly. Private businesses don't have to let you in to do that ever, unless you are renting said space from them.

 

Hitler did what he did because he terrorized his citizens. If you spoke out against him/his rules, you had the police state show up and kill/maim your family in front of you for your treasonous behavior. Not sure why people think it's cause they were lacking in critical thinking skills. Sheer terror will drive anyone to do what must be done to protect yourself and your family.

 

Critical thinking is deeply rooted in IQ levels. Bigotry, racism, and their ilk is indicative of having a lower IQ. Now keep in mind, this doesn't equate to those having grown up in the era of rampant racism being of lower intelligence. It is simply the way they were taught, and as such might be able to change their views, but it's really hard to teach an old dog new tricks. There's a massive list (locked behind subscriptions for peer reviewed and accepted theories in the world of psychology, sociology and psychiatry) that breaks down the nastiest, most vile behaviors and their corresponding IQ levels. It's really eye opening to say the least.

[ShardODarkness]

In-action is an action, and in-action here means my cash is going to provide a platform for this filth, which is something I find unacceptable.

 

...ignoring them is ACTION, turning off general chat is ACTION, denying them a response is ACTION.

[Eshvara]

 

Hitler did what he did because he terrorized his citizens. If you spoke out against him/his rules, you had the police state show up and kill/maim your family in front of you for your treasonous behavior. Not sure why people think it's cause they were lacking in critical thinking skills. Sheer terror will drive anyone to do what must be done to protect yourself and your family.

 

Hitler had a lot of supporters, they didn't follow him just due to fear. While I'm sure there were enough people that did, saying that's the case for all people is silly. Those people did agree on a lot of things that he said, against gays, and handicapped people. He also promised Germans a lot of good things coming their way, that he didn't really follow through on.

But yeah, if you think fear is the only reason why Hitler had supporters, you can.

 

Even today there are still people who support him while he's dead, who wish he could have been around. Is that because they are scared as well, or is that because they believe he could have changed the world for the better?

You should watch men in the high castle season 1 and 2, it's an amazing series.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Eshvara