When I said community as a whole, I meant everyone, including me. That's why I didn't just say "you people". I know I wasn't quite a saint.
WOW! You STILL don't get it!
If the person who hacked this site did it because of the disagreements/arguments over the fabricator timer, then that doesn't make the rest of us responsible! We did not cause this! You're "disheartened" with us, because of one person's illegal actions?
I'll spell this out, clearly...
The only person you should have any "disheartening", disappointing, or any other negative feelings for is the criminal who hacked this forum. Everyone else was having a discussion, nothing more.
When I said community as a whole, I meant everyone, including me. That's why I didn't just say "you people". I know I wasn't quite a saint.
WOW! You STILL don't get it!
If the person who hacked this site did it because of the disagreements/arguments over the fabricator timer, then that doesn't make the rest of us responsible! We did not cause this! You're "disheartened" with us, because of one person's illegal actions?
I'll spell this out, clearly...
The only person you should have any "disheartening", disappointing, or any other negative feelings for is the criminal who hacked this forum. Everyone else was having a discussion, nothing more.
If that was how the world worked, there would be a lot less racism, retaliatory crimes, wars, bad stuff in general.
One person's actions can absolutely make his entire, innocent peer group look worse to others.
For example, the growth in right wing beliefs currently taking place in England makes me pretty ashamed to call myself English. You're right, in an idealistic world, that wouldn't be the case. But we all have egos to account for.
When I said community as a whole, I meant everyone, including me. That's why I didn't just say "you people". I know I wasn't quite a saint.
WOW! You STILL don't get it!
If the person who hacked this site did it because of the disagreements/arguments over the fabricator timer, then that doesn't make the rest of us responsible! We did not cause this! You're "disheartened" with us, because of one person's illegal actions?
I'll spell this out, clearly...
The only person you should have any "disheartening", disappointing, or any other negative feelings for is the criminal who hacked this forum. Everyone else was having a discussion, nothing more.
Let me make this quite clear. If someone from a group gets so salty over an issue that they hack that group's website, the group holds some blame for letting the issue reach such a hostile level. This issue of the timers got WAY out of hand, and you may not have contributed, but you let it happen. I saw only a few people trying to de-escalate the argument, because some people really needed to chill out. If more of us had, maybe it could've stayed civil. Don't shift the blame. Share it, because we all could've done something, and some of us did, and some of us didn't.
Waitaminute... so to "detoxify" the forums I should have Whirl pose with a couple of Barbie dolls (I would use Starscream due to his supposed popularity with women but a female friend of mine borrowed/stole him ages ago)?
Let me make this quite clear. If someone from a group gets so salty over an issue that they hack that group's website, the group holds some blame for letting the issue reach such a hostile level.
No. Not even close.
It doesn't matter how "hostile", "salty", or "toxic" a conversation gets, there is no excuse, no reason, and no justification for criminal acts. You can't calm someone down who is committed to being an a$$hole. That was their choice, and they alone bear the responsibility for it.
Let me make this quite clear. If someone from a group gets so salty over an issue that they hack that group's website, the group holds some blame for letting the issue reach such a hostile level.
No. Not even close.
It doesn't matter how "hostile", "salty", or "toxic" a conversation gets, there is no excuse, no reason, and no justification for criminal acts. You can't calm someone down who is committed to being an a$$hole. That was their choice, and they alone bear the responsibility for it.
I never said the hack was justified, and I never will. I was merely saying the argument could've been kept from reaching the level that it did, and that if that's the reason for this, then we all bear some small level of responsibility. You may not be able to calm someone committed to being an ass, but you can give them less of a reason to commit in the first place.
Let me make this quite clear. If someone from a group gets so salty over an issue that they hack that group's website, the group holds some blame for letting the issue reach such a hostile level.
No. Not even close.
It doesn't matter how "hostile", "salty", or "toxic" a conversation gets, there is no excuse, no reason, and no justification for criminal acts. You can't calm someone down who is committed to being an a$$hole. That was their choice, and they alone bear the responsibility for it.
I never said the hack was justified, and I never will. I was merely saying the argument could've been kept from reaching the level that it did, and that if that's the reason for this, then we all bear some small level of responsibility. You may not be able to calm someone committed to being an ass, but you can give them less of a reason to commit in the first place.
And I'm saying we bear NO responsibility. None. Nada. Zilch.
The discussion could've gotten a hundred times more toxic than it did and my opinion wouldn't change. Hurt feeling don't count as harm and don't justify lashing out. I was OG on alt.flames back in the day - that was our "safe space". Seriously, people need to go back there and get used to having uncivil conversations without getting upset at the world.
Let me make this quite clear. If someone from a group gets so salty over an issue that they hack that group's website, the group holds some blame for letting the issue reach such a hostile level.
No. Not even close.
It doesn't matter how "hostile", "salty", or "toxic" a conversation gets, there is no excuse, no reason, and no justification for criminal acts. You can't calm someone down who is committed to being an a$$hole. That was their choice, and they alone bear the responsibility for it.
I never said the hack was justified, and I never will. I was merely saying the argument could've been kept from reaching the level that it did, and that if that's the reason for this, then we all bear some small level of responsibility. You may not be able to calm someone committed to being an ass, but you can give them less of a reason to commit in the first place.
And I'm saying we bear NO responsibility. None. Nada. Zilch.
The discussion could've gotten a hundred times more toxic than it did and my opinion wouldn't change. Hurt feeling don't count as harm and don't justify lashing out. I was OG on alt.flames back in the day - that was our "safe space". Seriously, people need to go back there and get used to having uncivil conversations without getting upset at the world.
So from what I gather, your opinion is that you can insult, berate, and belittle someone all you want and then bear no responsibilities if they lash out. Sure, people could stand to have a bit of a thicker skin, but that doesn't give you the right to be an ass.
Let me make this quite clear. If someone from a group gets so salty over an issue that they hack that group's website, the group holds some blame for letting the issue reach such a hostile level.
No. Not even close.
It doesn't matter how "hostile", "salty", or "toxic" a conversation gets, there is no excuse, no reason, and no justification for criminal acts. You can't calm someone down who is committed to being an a$$hole. That was their choice, and they alone bear the responsibility for it.
I never said the hack was justified, and I never will. I was merely saying the argument could've been kept from reaching the level that it did, and that if that's the reason for this, then we all bear some small level of responsibility. You may not be able to calm someone committed to being an ass, but you can give them less of a reason to commit in the first place.
And I'm saying we bear NO responsibility. None. Nada. Zilch.
The discussion could've gotten a hundred times more toxic than it did and my opinion wouldn't change. Hurt feeling don't count as harm and don't justify lashing out. I was OG on alt.flames back in the day - that was our "safe space". Seriously, people need to go back there and get used to having uncivil conversations without getting upset at the world.
So from what I gather, your opinion is that you can insult, berate, and belittle someone all you want and then bear no responsibilities if they lash out. Sure, people could stand to have a bit of a thicker skin, but that doesn't give you the right to be an ass.
You gather correctly. The very first amendment to the US Constitution exists to protect offensive and unpopular speech.
I do my best to be civil, but I'm not perfect. On occasion I've responded to trolls and such with a bit more 'heat' than was necessary as well. People are always responsible for their own actions. If you can't handle that, stay off the internet, and away from other people in general.
Am I the only one who saw that discussion as something positive? At least a debate took place. Most of the times that calming that dealwithitdog is talking about is either just locking the thread or just post over and over again to wait for the devs and their actions. This way people were in least involved.
And if that hack was done by somebody of that discussion (which I don't believe at all) than they were just a dick that nobody should care about. No real harm was done.
You gather correctly. The very first amendment to the US Constitution exists to protect offensive and unpopular speech.
I do my best to be civil, but I'm not perfect. On occasion I've responded to trolls and such with a bit more 'heat' than was necessary as well. People are always responsible for their own actions. If you can't handle that, stay off the internet, and away from other people in general.
I actually agree with you in principal, in an ideal world. And I think people need to actually read what people write more, and read between the lines more, and not take offense so easily. "I am offended" is the most meaningless, absolutely asinine phrase any person can utter.
And yet, this forum is not the US of A. Thank God. And we have no constitution here.
This forum is very easy going as the internet goes, but the "rules" are very clear.
1. Please behave politely at all times. That means refraining from swearing and disrespectful comments (racist, homophobic, religious, etc.).
2. Be a decent human in general: Don’t flame, troll, or be mean to other people
3. Our admins will, in the worst cases, ban accounts and IPs for bad behaviour.
I would say "insulting, berating and belittling" falls very clearly under "disrespectful comments".
And if that hack was done by somebody of that discussion (which I don't believe at all) than they were just a dick that nobody should care about. No real harm was done.
Let me make this quite clear. If someone from a group gets so salty over an issue that they hack that group's website, the group holds some blame for letting the issue reach such a hostile level.
No. Not even close.
It doesn't matter how "hostile", "salty", or "toxic" a conversation gets, there is no excuse, no reason, and no justification for criminal acts. You can't calm someone down who is committed to being an a$$hole. That was their choice, and they alone bear the responsibility for it.
I never said the hack was justified, and I never will. I was merely saying the argument could've been kept from reaching the level that it did, and that if that's the reason for this, then we all bear some small level of responsibility. You may not be able to calm someone committed to being an ass, but you can give them less of a reason to commit in the first place.
And I'm saying we bear NO responsibility. None. Nada. Zilch.
The discussion could've gotten a hundred times more toxic than it did and my opinion wouldn't change. Hurt feeling don't count as harm and don't justify lashing out. I was OG on alt.flames back in the day - that was our "safe space". Seriously, people need to go back there and get used to having uncivil conversations without getting upset at the world.
So from what I gather, your opinion is that you can insult, berate, and belittle someone all you want and then bear no responsibilities if they lash out. Sure, people could stand to have a bit of a thicker skin, but that doesn't give you the right to be an ass.
You gather correctly. The very first amendment to the US Constitution exists to protect offensive and unpopular speech.
I do my best to be civil, but I'm not perfect. On occasion I've responded to trolls and such with a bit more 'heat' than was necessary as well. People are always responsible for their own actions. If you can't handle that, stay off the internet, and away from other people in general.
It may protect you to an extent, but if you call someone a very offensive name and they punch you in the mouth for it you're still the aggressor because you provoked them.
Moving on, say you inflicted psychological damage on an individual such the they take their own life. You would be responsible for that happening, as you inflicted said damage.
And I don't need to handle that because most people realize that they can actually influence others and are thus able to take responsibility.
It may protect you to an extent, but if you call someone a very offensive name and they punch you in the mouth for it you're still the aggressor because you provoked them.
Actually I think that is a situation where both parties would be the aggressors. Party A started it but party Bs bahaviour would still be wrong. In my country (Germany) the puncher would lose in court if he was sued by the verbal aggressor. The provocation would just count as attenuating circumstances which would lower the sentence.
It may protect you to an extent, but if you call someone a very offensive name and they punch you in the mouth for it you're still the aggressor because you provoked them.
"... so then I punched him in the face for asking, and while he was picking his teeth up off the floor, his friend decided to say a few choice words about my heritage. So then I punched him, too. So to make a long story short, I take pride in what I do; fighting. It's something you can't get enough of, and it's something where there's always room for improvement, if you apply yourself, stay focussed and keep swinging."--Khelgar Ironfist.
LOL @Obraxis *aggressively flicks lights on and off...dont make me come down to that forum page. Thanks for letting them has out their differences while making sure it stays respectful. Many forums I've been a part of just squash any condescension or differing opinion without giving a chance to work it out and at least here most have acted like humans.
"Too Easy" is exactly what I'd expect a generic script kiddie to say if they managed to infiltrate the site through some obvious and well known exploit.
You gather correctly. The very first amendment to the US Constitution exists to protect offensive and unpopular speech.
I do my best to be civil, but I'm not perfect. On occasion I've responded to trolls and such with a bit more 'heat' than was necessary as well. People are always responsible for their own actions. If you can't handle that, stay off the internet, and away from other people in general.
Okay, this is just plain incorrect. I'm sorry if I sound pedantic, but you're missing an important clause at the end of your sentence about the Constitution: "FROM THE GOVERNMENT".
The 1st Amendment says you can say what you want, publish what you want, and THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT cannot punish you for the content of your speech. Private citizens may behave as they like, provided they do not break any other laws themselves while doing so.
If you say unpopular or offensive things in public, people can and will legally shout you down, insult you, or do any number of unpleasant things as long as they don't break the law. Moreover, internet discussion forums have never counted as "public" for purposes of free speech. This place is owned by Unknown Worlds, and they can turn it off or ban you for any reason or no reason at all.
In practice, it's bad to ignore your own TOS when dealing with forum posters (unwarranted bans just make everyone leave and not come back, then you have no discussion), but other than that they can do as they like, and posters can say what they like back to you as long as they themselves aren't violating the TOS.
See the pattern here? There's a reason it's noble to preach "truth to power" or what have you because it's often unpopular and carries unofficial but still negative consequences. It's not noble because "it's protected by the 1st Amendment". That covers writing a letter to the editor of your hometown newspaper about how the Mayor is a tool and stole your parking space or whatever. He or she isn't allowed to then send the cops to your house and arrest you. It has nothing to do with opinions in a private forum about a video game.
What's that in your signature, Coolitic? I think I'll make something similar using my current Cybertronian avatar...
@Lonnehart I didn't make it (just cropped it). It's Sylux from Metroid Prime: Hunters.
Also, FWIW,
Metroid > Megaman
Ah... Shouldn't be too hard to replicate. Autobot Whirl is decently posable. Just have to get him into robot mode first... Too bad he never gets to be in animation...
On the subject, looks like the toxicity levels have gone down. But I expect it to go back up a while after the update comes out...
I just came back from a week without internet discovering the same thing, some of my posts and disagrees/agrees/awesomes were gone. I didn't expect the forums to get hacked during my absence.
Comments
If the person who hacked this site did it because of the disagreements/arguments over the fabricator timer, then that doesn't make the rest of us responsible! We did not cause this! You're "disheartened" with us, because of one person's illegal actions?
I'll spell this out, clearly...
The only person you should have any "disheartening", disappointing, or any other negative feelings for is the criminal who hacked this forum. Everyone else was having a discussion, nothing more.
It's sad that one person decided to act on the forums like this. Of course, he's going to say its OUR fault that he did that...
If that was how the world worked, there would be a lot less racism, retaliatory crimes, wars, bad stuff in general.
One person's actions can absolutely make his entire, innocent peer group look worse to others.
For example, the growth in right wing beliefs currently taking place in England makes me pretty ashamed to call myself English. You're right, in an idealistic world, that wouldn't be the case. But we all have egos to account for.
Let me make this quite clear. If someone from a group gets so salty over an issue that they hack that group's website, the group holds some blame for letting the issue reach such a hostile level. This issue of the timers got WAY out of hand, and you may not have contributed, but you let it happen. I saw only a few people trying to de-escalate the argument, because some people really needed to chill out. If more of us had, maybe it could've stayed civil. Don't shift the blame. Share it, because we all could've done something, and some of us did, and some of us didn't.
No. Not even close.
It doesn't matter how "hostile", "salty", or "toxic" a conversation gets, there is no excuse, no reason, and no justification for criminal acts. You can't calm someone down who is committed to being an a$$hole. That was their choice, and they alone bear the responsibility for it.
I never said the hack was justified, and I never will. I was merely saying the argument could've been kept from reaching the level that it did, and that if that's the reason for this, then we all bear some small level of responsibility. You may not be able to calm someone committed to being an ass, but you can give them less of a reason to commit in the first place.
And I'm saying we bear NO responsibility. None. Nada. Zilch.
The discussion could've gotten a hundred times more toxic than it did and my opinion wouldn't change. Hurt feeling don't count as harm and don't justify lashing out. I was OG on alt.flames back in the day - that was our "safe space". Seriously, people need to go back there and get used to having uncivil conversations without getting upset at the world.
So from what I gather, your opinion is that you can insult, berate, and belittle someone all you want and then bear no responsibilities if they lash out. Sure, people could stand to have a bit of a thicker skin, but that doesn't give you the right to be an ass.
You gather correctly. The very first amendment to the US Constitution exists to protect offensive and unpopular speech.
I do my best to be civil, but I'm not perfect. On occasion I've responded to trolls and such with a bit more 'heat' than was necessary as well. People are always responsible for their own actions. If you can't handle that, stay off the internet, and away from other people in general.
And if that hack was done by somebody of that discussion (which I don't believe at all) than they were just a dick that nobody should care about. No real harm was done.
I actually agree with you in principal, in an ideal world. And I think people need to actually read what people write more, and read between the lines more, and not take offense so easily. "I am offended" is the most meaningless, absolutely asinine phrase any person can utter.
And yet, this forum is not the US of A. Thank God. And we have no constitution here.
This forum is very easy going as the internet goes, but the "rules" are very clear.
1. Please behave politely at all times. That means refraining from swearing and disrespectful comments (racist, homophobic, religious, etc.).
2. Be a decent human in general: Don’t flame, troll, or be mean to other people
3. Our admins will, in the worst cases, ban accounts and IPs for bad behaviour.
I would say "insulting, berating and belittling" falls very clearly under "disrespectful comments".
This. So much this.
It may protect you to an extent, but if you call someone a very offensive name and they punch you in the mouth for it you're still the aggressor because you provoked them.
Moving on, say you inflicted psychological damage on an individual such the they take their own life. You would be responsible for that happening, as you inflicted said damage.
And I don't need to handle that because most people realize that they can actually influence others and are thus able to take responsibility.
Actually I think that is a situation where both parties would be the aggressors. Party A started it but party Bs bahaviour would still be wrong. In my country (Germany) the puncher would lose in court if he was sued by the verbal aggressor. The provocation would just count as attenuating circumstances which would lower the sentence.
"... so then I punched him in the face for asking, and while he was picking his teeth up off the floor, his friend decided to say a few choice words about my heritage. So then I punched him, too. So to make a long story short, I take pride in what I do; fighting. It's something you can't get enough of, and it's something where there's always room for improvement, if you apply yourself, stay focussed and keep swinging."--Khelgar Ironfist.
You're gonna get monsters that way!
I don't think it means anything beyond that.
I lost my big suggestion post though.
Okay, this is just plain incorrect. I'm sorry if I sound pedantic, but you're missing an important clause at the end of your sentence about the Constitution: "FROM THE GOVERNMENT".
The 1st Amendment says you can say what you want, publish what you want, and THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT cannot punish you for the content of your speech. Private citizens may behave as they like, provided they do not break any other laws themselves while doing so.
If you say unpopular or offensive things in public, people can and will legally shout you down, insult you, or do any number of unpleasant things as long as they don't break the law. Moreover, internet discussion forums have never counted as "public" for purposes of free speech. This place is owned by Unknown Worlds, and they can turn it off or ban you for any reason or no reason at all.
In practice, it's bad to ignore your own TOS when dealing with forum posters (unwarranted bans just make everyone leave and not come back, then you have no discussion), but other than that they can do as they like, and posters can say what they like back to you as long as they themselves aren't violating the TOS.
See the pattern here? There's a reason it's noble to preach "truth to power" or what have you because it's often unpopular and carries unofficial but still negative consequences. It's not noble because "it's protected by the 1st Amendment". That covers writing a letter to the editor of your hometown newspaper about how the Mayor is a tool and stole your parking space or whatever. He or she isn't allowed to then send the cops to your house and arrest you. It has nothing to do with opinions in a private forum about a video game.
There. Is that settled now?
Yeah, that entire argument was based ENTIRELY off of a hypothetical notion. Sometimes I get a little overly passionate about my arguments.
@Lonnehart I didn't make it (just cropped it). It's Sylux from Metroid Prime: Hunters.
Also, FWIW,
Ah... Shouldn't be too hard to replicate. Autobot Whirl is decently posable. Just have to get him into robot mode first... Too bad he never gets to be in animation...
On the subject, looks like the toxicity levels have gone down. But I expect it to go back up a while after the update comes out...
I'm sorry, what?
So what you're actually saying is... We can blame you