[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot ] [ arch ]

/canterlot/ - Canterlot

Site related staff board
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]

 No.1099

File: 1496901249760.jpeg (787.35 KB, 1000x1390, 100:139, Megumin-Kono-Suba-3743812.jpeg) ImgOps Google

I was warned for >>>/pony/507860, and specifically Rules 6 and 11 were mentioned.  Respectfully, I would like to note that my post clearly does not even come close to violating Rule 11; not a single word in my post is even arguably an offensive slur.  

Rule 6 is: "Don't shitpost. We define shitpost as: threads that are purposely created to add nothing to the site, regurgitating spamlike content which is low in creativity, and with potential ill intentions that contribute negatively to the site."

Let me address each criterion.
"threads that are purposely created to add nothing to the site": The post was a reply, not a thread, and furthermore, at least IMHO, it was not completely devoid of humor value.  I realize that the site staff might disagree and hold that the post had zero or negative value, but that is inherently a very subjective judgement and little guidance is available in regards to how the site staff measures the value of posts.

"regurgitating spamlike content which is low in creativity": I think it should be fairly clear from my recent post history that I haven't been spamming or regurgitating posts substantially similar to that post.

"with potential ill intentions that contribute negatively to the site": I don't know how you are trying to infer my intentions, but I can assure they that they weren't ill.  It is apparent now that others didn't find my post as funny as I did, but that constitutes only a failure of judgement on my part, not ill intentions.

So, I would like to request additional guidance on what exactly the site staff finds objectionable about my post.  I realize it's not one of the finest posts on the site, and likely it's even in the bottom 10% of posts, but I don't see how it is even skirting the lines of the rules.

 No.1100

File: 1497333358336.png (205.73 KB, 425x422, 425:422, .png) ImgOps Google

I did not take offence to the post andfound the ban sort of surprising.

I can imagine where it comes from. Because the post is /pol/ trollbait-y, asserting that muslims are rapists (and those who allow them to be are cucklords who want to get raped).
Same could be towards Black people/hispanics/mentally handicapt/…
I think Ponyville definitely wants (and needs) to steer away from that culture, even if there's 'humour' that involves commentaries on muslims/immigrants/… in a meme-y way.

I don't know about your history and if you ever made similar jokes or threads.
But I would avoid posting jokes of that type. If anyone wants to discuss immigration and sorts of that, itb would require a well built serious thread without the memes.

 No.1101

>>1100
> asserting that muslims are rapists
Oh, is that how you interpreted it?  By "take your bodily fluids" I meant that terrorist bombings often exsanguinate at least some of the victims.

 No.1102

File: 1497381543138.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, shy fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google

Hi anon. When it comes to the reports we receive, our rule as a staff is to err in favor of lenience whenever possible.

We received a number of different reports concerning your post, and i discussed the situation briefly with another moderator.

i opted to apply a warning, in lieu of a ban, as we have a fairly substantial post history of rule-skirting behavior and otherwise dismissed reports, for baiting, political derailing, and Rule 6 violations from you.

The only means the staff really has for interpreting ill intentions is to look at the record of posts and how a user chooses to interact with the site, and the community.

Anons as well, in particular, can be difficult to adjudicate, as many have switching IP addresses, without any sort of name or characteristic to link one anon's actions to another.

>>1101
we had at least three separate posters interpret your post as having meant this. i had interpreted it myself as shedding of blood.

The ambiguous thread OP post, combined with this obvious political statement, finally interpreted in light of both your post history, and the reports received both for the thread OP post, and the post in question, pushed this over the line from a dismissal, to a report requiring action. As we have issued warnings in the past, this was escalated to a ban, but de-escalated back to a warning, so as to be more in line with our preference for leniency.

i hope that our decision makes more sense now.

 No.1118

File: 1498792378352.png (137.72 KB, 588x705, 196:235, 525897.png) ImgOps Google

>>1102
Does the mod staff try to be viewpoint-neutral in determinations of whether a given post constitutes shitposting, or are certain political viewpoints intentionally discriminated against?

E.g., a warning was given for >>>/pony/525897 with the note "It's literally a nazi propaganda film".  Would a warning also have been given for a Japanese propaganda film or an American propaganda film?                                                                       

I ask because the text of the rule itself is viewpoint-neutral, but the site staff appear to applying it in a discriminatory manner.

(Also, in case it is unclear to normal users who can't see IPs, I am not the same anon as the anon who posted >>>/pony/525897)

 No.1119

>>1118
P.S. To clarify, please note that I am not saying that Nazi propaganda should be allowed on the site.  I am merely pointing out that the rules, as they are currently written, do not prohibit it.  

 No.1120

File: 1498873613664.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google

>>1118
>>1119
Nazi iconography in a public space is generally seen as hate crime material. And Nazi stuff online, especially, is a hallmark of sh*tposting, if i understand it correctly.

The rules are there, and we have a constitution to try and highlight the spirit of those rules. i -could- theoretically, write out every last thing that needs to be made into a rule, but this would lead to our rulebook being very, very large, and somewhat arbitrary looking from the outside.

we do our best then, to handle situations in the most reasonable manner possible, given the circumstances.


A new IP, who's first post is nazi propaganda followed by the Nazi pony… is likely a sh*tposter, and they didnt' receive a ban. Just a warning, without any timer on the offense.

They could have posted or resumed posting. But didn't.

 No.1121

File: 1498873744998.png (568.83 KB, 765x835, 153:167, eh heh.png) ImgOps Google

>>1119
>>1118
i should also say, i am grateful anon, for you pointing these things out. As i think, in the interest of fairness, these decisions do need community input, as it helps us on staff to gauge what the community views as fair or unfair.

my personal opinion on the OP subject, for example, has changed more towards what you've explained for me in this thread.

these discussions are very useful, and i hope you will not feel like you are judged poorly for them. quite the opposite, i respect very much your stand against what may genuinely seem like arbitrary ruling… i know, i was once in your very shoes, feeling the very same way.

 No.1123

File: 1498880386488.png (170.04 KB, 560x600, 14:15, 143382141040.png) ImgOps Google

>>1120
>Nazi iconography in a public space is generally seen as hate crime material.
Um, maybe in Europe, but not in America — it is constitutionally protected free speech here.  E.g., National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 (1977).

> And Nazi stuff online, especially, is a hallmark of sh*tposting, if i understand it correctly.
Yes, Nazi stuff is often used for shitposting/funposting.  But some people (not me) genuinely believe in or admire *some* aspects of National Socialism, or just think that it's a fun topic.  So not all Nazi-related posts are shitposts.  And furthermore the definition of "shitposting" in Rule 6 is much narrower than common definitions of "shitposting".  E.g., I think >>>/pony/522331 might be called "shitposting" in common parlance, but it wouldn't qualify as shitposting under Rule 6.  As for Fleur's Nazi military thread (>>>/pony/525897), I think it would definitely qualify as "shitposting" in common parlance, but I think it's more questionable whether it qualifies under Rule 6.  So I suggest you add another sentence such as "Posting widely offensive material may lead site staff to make negative inferences about the poster's purposes and intentions" or something like that to Rule 6.

>>1121
Thanks, Moony!  And I definitely appreciate the work you do in administering this site.

 No.1124

File: 1498893081326.png (784.46 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, -_S6E1.png) ImgOps Google

>>1120
>Nazi iconography in a public space is generally seen as hate crime material. And Nazi stuff online, especially, is a hallmark of sh*tposting, if i understand it correctly.

If you're going to ban nazi iconography, which I support you in doing, then you should ban communist iconography as well.

 No.1125

File: 1498988244925.png (109.09 KB, 347x336, 347:336, hmm.png) ImgOps Google

Personally, this is a tricky subject to balance.

The internet being what it is has plenty of material to discuss and even more so to water down with humor/jokes.
I'd feel sad if we need to set a stern rule that banishes these things on sight.

However, at the same time, we see how these can be toxic to the place, when certain individuals use it to provoke, to troll and fish for reactions. Because coming here to another 'Gas all Jews' or 'Hitler is the superior leader' thread is very turpid for a community.
So you might wonder where exactly the line must lie to moderate properly without being too restrictive.

I really wouldn't mind a person avatarring as Arianne myself, or even Hitler.
But once that person starts playing the part, I'd want him off this property.

>>1123
Also, has it been Fleur?
I thought he angrilly left.
Well, he knows the rules and the sensitivities. He really shouldn't keep provoking.

 No.1127

>>1124
I get where you're coming from with this, as Communist regimes have ended up horrible and plenty of the "far-left" can be horrible but ideologically Nazism and Communism are far from equal and one is definitely more inherently intolerant and generally awful than the other. While Nazism in ideology also does not have to be as terrible as it was in practice, it does not take much to research the two ideologically and see that they are on very different levels.

The problem with Communism ideologically is that it is currently a pipe dream (with some exceptions, look at Tito's regime for example) that can be exploited, it's not evil and it shouldn't be treated as such, nor is it inherently hateful. At the very least, you have to admit that Nazism is far closer to inherently hateful.

In my opinion neither should be banned but perhaps they should be highly frowned upon. Moony's way of doing it

>A new IP, who's first post is nazi propaganda followed by the Nazi pony… is likely a sh*tposter, and they didnt' receive a ban. Just a warning, without any timer on the offense.

Seems like a good way of handling it as well.

 No.1128

>>1124
Communism may be just as controversial as Nazism in many ways, but Nazi iconography also carries with it a powerful message of racial hatred.

Hammer and sickles might not be a very sightly thing, but having them in public spaces won't have the NYPD hate crime task force investigating it, for example.

But a swastika is a totally different thing, i feel

 No.1129

>>1123
To clarify further, Skokie was a case concerning a march through a town - a legal, public gathering and display, in a public space.

if one wanted to stage a nazi rally, or a kkk rally or something, they could do that with all the hateful iconography

if one wanted to hang a nazi flag up in their own home, they could

you are right then, to say that it is free speech. i should have been more clear, myself

but if you want to put a swastika someplace where it isn't welcome, it isn't just regular defacement, it is a hate crime.

what i had tried to conveyed, but did so unclearly, was that nazi iconography is placed at a more grievous standard than regular defacement - it is a more serious issue, than a random collection of words, for example

In rising to the standard of sh*tposting, i feel, it had met the mark, in this case

>>1127
i feel like the response to the poster was very reasonable a response

 No.1130

>>1127  You can't take 'real life' Nazism on one hand and compare it to 'best case' communism on the other - never mind that even 'best case' communism is absolutely deplorable.  Speaking of which, communism is not free of genocides either.  And when you look at raw death totals - communism comes out so much farther ahead of Nazism that it's absurd.
>>1128  The NYPD hate crime task force is irrelevant.

If you say that the swastika carries with it the Nazi baggage, then the hammer and sickle absolutely carries with it the baggage of all the regimes that existed under it.  You say you want this to be a welcoming place?  Well, if I see hammers and sickles posted everywhere, I won't feel welcome, but I understand that's just my opinion.  If I see hammer and sickles posted everwhere, with the caveat that the symbol of a regime that's no worse is banned while this one isn't, then that's just hypocritical, and I'll see myself out rather than abide by it, thanks.

 No.1131

File: 1499835968694.png (254.03 KB, 537x768, 179:256, 4543543543543.png) ImgOps Google

I agree on the notion if you're going ban Nazi type things like that (which is fine), communist things needs to go as well.  The atrocities committed under communist rule were hardly different than that of Nazi Germany.  This is a undeniable fact.  Things like Holodomor, The Katyn massacre, etc.  Not to mention Stalin had a severe disdain of the Jews himself. They invaded Poland like Hitler did, they enslaved pretty much all of Eastern Europe forcing them to be indoctrinated into the Communist ideology.  They have caused several ethnic conflicts in Yugoslavia and that ever so continued after the fall of the USSR.  Acts of genocide, forced labor camps.  There's a why the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation (AKA the Communist holocaust) exists.  The idea that Communism as innocent as Nazim is just flat-out absurd.

It should be condemned and rightfully so.

That's my two sense here.

- t. former communist  

 No.1132

File: 1499838839109.png (239.56 KB, 493x641, 493:641, 56546546546839904442227454….png) ImgOps Google

I find it kinda sad that that the hammer and sickle aren't universally understood to be condemned. I don't want to hear "that's not real communism, man".

I guess it's because because USSR was a """""ally""""" with us against the axis so they're seen as heros despite what they've done soon after leading us to the cold war.

You should know all about Mao's China, Moony.

Anyway, just trying to be fair and stressing this, and I wish more people would understand NatSoc and Communism were basically two-sides of the same coin.

Just something to think about.

 No.1133

File: 1499861456146.jpg (116.86 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, Shinobu_Episode_6_Karen_Be….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1130
I'm pretty sure that Moony didn't say that he's going to outright ban all Nazi swastikas yet allow ad libitum posting of the Communist hammer & sickle.  He seemed to say that, when determining whether a given post is a shitpost, he's going to give heavy weight to the fact that many people online use Nazi iconography to shitpost and that there is comparatively little use of Nazi iconography for reasons that would comply with the rules of this site.  But when a thread is clearly non-shitposting, I expect it would considered in compliance with the rules even if it incidentally contains a Nazi swastika.  E.g., http://ponyville.us/pony/res/536445.html

 No.1134

Nevermind that the attrocities of the Crusades warrants a zero tolerance on Christian iconography.

 No.1154

File: 1500847397807.png (103.25 KB, 500x355, 100:71, DJ-,,,-DotsWut.png) ImgOps Google

Nazism is different from communism in that Nazism inherently has clear and specific racism in its basic tenets.

While communist regimes and nazi regimes both resulted in the deaths of millions, there are some that would argue that it wasn't communism itself that killed those people, but the dictators who used communism to do so. However, that argument cannot work for nazism, which is built entirely around a racist ideology.

There are many who argue for communist or socialist ideals with the idea that it will help everyone. However, anyone who argues in favor of nazism is implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) supporting racism and genocide.

This is why they are different. Communism isn't hateful. It may be deadly, but not inherently hateful. Nazism 100% is. And personally, I will treat each post accordingly.


As for the free speech argument, most speech is okay until it openly advocates strong violence against innocents, which nazi propaganda inherently does. Such a message is not tolerated here. You may have the legal right to say or write those things, but we still have the legal right to ban you for doing so.


And finally, if you wish to civilly discuss nazism and its history without openly advocating it, that is fine. It may be super iffy for some posters, but it's fine. But straight up posting nazi propaganda without any context does not count towards civil discussion.

That is my view.

 No.1156

File: 1500862388114.png (67.92 KB, 379x270, 379:270, bakemonogatari-cosplay-shi….png) ImgOps Google

>>1154
>However, anyone who argues in favor of nazism is implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) supporting racism and genocide.
I disagree.  Hitler tried to hide the death camps from most of the Nazi rank-and-file civilian population.  Why would he do that if they supported genocide?  The answer is that even most Nazi party members would not approve of genocide.  And while Nazism does have a tenet that some races are objectively superior to others, some people might subscribe to the core politico-economic tenets of National Socialism while rejecting the racism.

>Nazism 100% is [hateful].
Not necessarily.  One might simply believe that certain groups need to be removed for the greater good of the nation, just like sickened livestock are destroyed to avoid spreading contagion.  

Anyhow, basically I've just been playing devil's advocate.  If someone comes here posting Nazi symbols in a way that suggests endorsement of Nazism, there's a 95%+ chance he's shitposting in violation of Rule 6.

 No.1172

>>1131
>>1130
>>1132
Nobody is saying that communism is better than Nazism. Communists committed enumerous atrocities.

The hammer and sickle might very well be the political symbol of a rightfully despised dogma. But the swastika is a universally understood symbol of hatred.

>>1133
this is the post that i feel makes the difference. if someone comes in to sh*tpost with communist iconography, they too will meet the same ignominious warning.

Nazi iconography is particularly known for its association to sh*tposting though, and the swastika in particular is a very notorious symbol of hatred.

 No.1173

File: 1501270498942.png (73.89 KB, 252x289, 252:289, let us have a look.png) ImgOps Google

>>1172
You've really learned a lot about the internet.


[]
[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot ] [ arch ]