- jordan -

[the Interceptor]

I agree that, by the rules, it is okay to post this video on the news page, but not on the forum. Still, I find it understandable that such things lead to strains within the GTPlanet membership, because it effectively introduces a two-class-society: things which are forbidden on the forum can be posted on the news page, but while everybody can use the forum, only a few can post on said news page. Inevitably, this would lead to discussions like this one, which is justified in my book.

The question is whether there is a good way to clarify the rules in a way to avoid such things in the future.

 

[TokyoDrift]

In this case, per your stated discretion, the Fallen video in itself does not warrant a deletion. Your conclusion is that there needs to be more consistency, which validates my position. Thanks for acknowledging what I am pointing out. The mod made a snap decision that created an inconsistent application of rule. Naturally being on the receiving end, I voiced my concern. As far as I am concerned, this topic is now closed.

Reading what Jordan wrote, I get the impression that a mod received a complaint, and they deleted it in accordance with the AUP. Why does that make it a "snap decision"? Besides, you should have done a search before posting as yours was a duplicate thread that needed deleting anyway!

Personally, I don't think Jordan or any of the moderators need to take any review action based on your outburst. The AUP rules are clear, and (assuming a complaint was received) a moderator took what they thought was appropriate action. Just accept the fact that these are living, breathing forums run by human beings who rarely, if ever, meet face-to-face, and have widely varying backgrounds and beliefs. Sure, there are rules to abide by, but you are naturally going to get a small (and your example is very small) bit of inconsistency.

A thread containing/referencing profanities posted one week could get viewed by people who simply find it funny, and go unnoticed by a mod. The same thread could get posted the next week and get reported by somebody who finds it offensive, or simply get seen by a mod. Depending on the material, if it is in the thread, linked to etc., you might find that one moderator will delete the thread, whereas another may simply remove the profanities and keep the thread open if it warrants continual, meaningful discussion.

Now, while I put my empty popcorn bag into the trash, I suggest you stop feeling sorry for yourself just because you had your thread deleted in what you deem unfair circumstances.

 

[No46_TheDoctor]

No, GTPlanet would be a forum with a lot less people in it, and that's it. It would still exist, still be there on a search engine, everything.

And it's the people who pay for Premium who keep this site going since their memberships pay the bills.

Hello ! People ! Wake Up ! Have you even noticed the ADVERTS on GTPlanet?

Seriously, some of you people are so naive it's not even funny !

 

[mafia_boy]

Hello ! People ! Wake Up ! Have you even noticed the ADVERTS on GTPlanet?

Seriously, some of you people are so naive it's not even funny !

HELLO!! DOCTOR!! WAKE UP!!! I'm a (lifetime) premium member, so I don't get ad's. Have fun with your pop-up's.


I could've been a lot more harsh in my reply (like flipping the E-bird at you) but I'm not in the mood to tear apart people right at this moment, so be thankful.

 

[the Interceptor]

Hello ! People ! Wake Up ! Have you even noticed the ADVERTS on GTPlanet?

Seriously, some of you people are so naive it's not even funny !

As far as I know, the adverts only bring in a tiny fraction of the money the premium memberships provide.

 

[Max Powers]

Don't use text speak please.

OH PLZ! He uses ONE example of TXT SPK and UR making nitpicky useless comments like that. Good grammar is cool but you don't have to be a dick about it. It's one thing to correct a native speaker with horribly lazy language, but to get that nitpicky about grammar in a completely clear and well-written post, well it makes you look like you really could use a hobby.

 

[ADEuk]

It does seem odd that a sweary video was removed from an obscure GT5 thread and later posted on what is probably the single most viewed page on the entire site...

 

[Dravonic]

It does seem odd that a sweary video was removed from an obscure GT5 thread and later posted on what is probably the single most viewed page on the entire site...

Thank you. Anyone with common sense should reach this conclusion.

 

[Danisfast]

I wonder if some acknowledgement of previous postings are in order? That way, said post, despite breaking the AUP, is validated when used by yourself, Jordan. I would also consider that links, unless constant and pointless in their usage of profanity, be given a more flexible time (or perhaps sectioned-off, like in the premium, or an adult, forum) than individual posts made by members themselves within those forums.

 

[garybee]

HELLO!! DOCTOR!! WAKE UP!!! I'm a (lifetime) premium member, so I don't get ad's. Have fun with your pop-up's.


I could've been a lot more harsh in my reply (like flipping the E-bird at you) but I'm not in the mood to tear apart people right at this moment, so be thankful.

Wow, lucky him

 

[Famine]

It does seem odd that a sweary video was removed from an obscure GT5 thread and later posted on what is probably the single most viewed page on the entire site...

Thank you. Anyone with common sense should reach this conclusion.

The AUP covers the forums. The video was posted in the forums by a user and removed by a member of staff.

The AUP doesn't cover the blog. The video was posted in the blog by the almost-sole-contributor to that blog and remains.

These are not contradictory in nature.


Given that the video was removed from the forums and no further action was taken against the user who posted it, I'm not seeing why there's any need for a big hub-bub. Bub.

 

[Dravonic]

The AUP covers the forums. The video was posted in the forums by a user and removed by a member of staff.

The AUP doesn't cover the blog. The video was posted in the blog by the almost-sole-contributor to that blog and remains.

These are not contradictory in nature.


Given that the video was removed from the forums and no further action was taken against the user who posted it, I'm not seeing why there's any need for a big hub-bub. Bub.

Yes, I get that no rule was being broken but it's deeper than that.

Why was the rule created in the first place? Jordan said it himself. He wants to encourage a more sophisticated level of discussion in the forum and forbidding profanities is a must to achieve this goal. I agree, makes sense. Rocker created the thread with the video and it was deleted since it includes profanities. It was removed not to "contaminate" the community, so to speak. I agree, makes sense. Then Jordan posted it in the front page. The front page which nearly everyone in the forum reads. That makes no sense. If something "contaminates" the community far more than a sweary video in an obscure thread, it's a sweary video in the front page. The whole "profanities are allowed in the front page" pretty much invalidates the "profanities are not allowed in the forums" rule.

Basically, since the front page is such an important part of the forum community, if something is not allowed in the forum, it makes no sense for it to be allowed in the front page. In a sense, the front page is "the example to be followed". Well, what a great example we have.

 

[Horde_R35]

Deep inside, you knew this would happen Jordan!

 

[Famine]

He wants to encourage a more sophisticated level of discussion in the forum and forbidding profanities is a must to achieve this goal.

Blog posts aren't discussed - they're posted (and then people comment on them in a manner akin to Youtube). Forum posts are discussed. If the rule exists to promote discussion, then the forum is where it is necessary - and since only the person who runs the site contributes to the blog, it's wholly unnecessary for any rules to exist. Even if they did, he could change them at will - that's part of the deal when you invest (time, money, whatever) into something that someone else has complete creative control over.

The whole "profanities are allowed in the front page" pretty much invalidates the "profanities are not allowed in the forums" rule.

Why? Who contributes to the forum? Everyone. Who contributes to the blog? Just Jordan.


I'll note that this is the first time GTP has "done" April Fools' day since the last, infamous occasion. I can't imagine feedback like this will do anything to promote willingness to do it again in the future.

 

[Moglet]

I think the real issue here is; why do people care so much? It's an online forum, not the UN.

Go outside, there's sunshine, clouds and all sorts! It's awesome.

 

[Dravonic]

Blog posts aren't discussed - they're posted (and then people comment on them in a manner akin to Youtube). Forum posts are discussed. If the rule exists to promote discussion, then the forum is where it is necessary - and since only the person who runs the site contributes to the blog, it's wholly unnecessary for any rules to exist. Even if they did, he could change them at will - that's part of the deal when you invest (time, money, whatever) into something that someone else has complete creative control over.

Why? Who contributes to the forum? Everyone. Who contributes to the blog? Just Jordan.

I'll note that this is the first time GTP has "done" April Fools' day since the last, infamous occasion. I can't imagine feedback like this will do anything to promote willingness to do it again in the future.

I encourage you to read the blog comments. Blog posts are discussed even if in theory they shouldn't. In fact, youtube is a great example. It's famous for having hilarious discussions in it's comments, where people seem to think that "🤬 you" is an argument, exactly because people there don't follow any rules.

Allowing anything in the front page invalidates forum rules simply because they are so closely related it makes no sense to treat them differently. Although in theory yes, the front page doesn't need any rules (though the comments need) since Jondan is the only one that posts there. And if he wants to enforce a rule you'd expect him to follow it due to the whole hypocrisy thing.

That said, I'm in no way accusing Jordan of hypocrisy. From his posts in this thread more specifically this one:

The problem with this rule, however, is that it is inflexible and nearly impossible to enforce consistently. Thread redundancy aside, the video in question is an excellent example of a highly relevant and appropriate piece of content which contains unavoidable profanity. The profanity rule should be flexible enough to allow situations like this to occur without placing a moderator in an uncomfortable position. Removing it seems almost draconian, yet to leave it alone is to ignore an AUP violation. Neither choice is really good for the moderators or the community, and more sophisticated wording should be used to handle this kind of nuance.

I can clearly see that he only posted the video in the front page because he thinks it's suitable to be posted in the forums. And I share his opinion. The video is a perfect example on why the profanity rule needs to be more lenient. What I can't understand is why with that settled I haven't seen anyone saying "yes we are going to be more lenient, these kinds of videos are going to be allowed, sorry about that".

 

[Famine]

Go outside, there's sunshine, clouds and all sorts! It's awesome.

More clouds than not. Rain too.

I encourage you to read the blog comments. Blog posts are discussed even if in theory they shouldn't. In fact, youtube is a great example. It's famous for having hilarious discussions in it's comments, where people seem to think that "🤬 you" is an argument, exactly because people there don't follow any rules.

Nevertheless, it is not discussed in the same manner. The comments posted are not by the individuals making the blog posts - and do not appear unless you wish them to (I never do wish them to - as they are generally at a level of Youtube as I mentioned).

Allowing anything in the front page invalidates forum rules simply because they are so closely related it makes no sense to treat them differently.

And yet they are different. One contributor vs. 130,000 - and comments can be made by people who do not even have a GTP account...

Although in theory yes, the front page doesn't need any rules (though the comments need) since Jondan is the only one that posts there. And if he wants to enforce a rule you'd expect him to follow it due to the whole hypocrisy thing.

On the forum yes, since the AUP applies to the forum.

I can clearly see that he only posted the video in the front page because he thinks it's suitable to be posted in the forums. And I share his opinion. The video is a perfect example on why the profanity rule needs to be more lenient. What I can't understand is why with that settled I haven't seen anyone saying "yes we are going to be more lenient, these kinds of videos are going to be allowed, sorry about that".

It is not the place of staff to say, publicly, what rules they will and will not enforce and how. It is the place of staff to follow Jordan's lead and enforce the rules as he would if he were there. It's a case of WWJD?

When the rules change we will change what we do - at the same time as you will change what you do within the scope of those rules changes, lest you come within the scope of what we do

 

[Moglet]

More clouds than not. Rain too.

It's been nice here all day

 

[Eric.]

Jordan, next time can it be "History of the F Word" on the homepage? Please? You have to top this. And after that, maybe some porn.


How about an analogy? I could drive my car loudly through the neighborhood, and people can either cuss at me, or they can take action and call the cops. Small chance I'd actually encounter a cop. For the rirst option, they deal with it. For the second and third options, I get a chat on the side of the road and maybe some nice colored paper. However if the car isn't obnoxiously loud and I ran into a cop, he may ignore it completely and just look for me to do something else worth pulling me over for. But if there have been complaints it is the cop's duty to take action.

Cops = mods
Noise, etc = your post
ticket = mod action
complaints = reported


I particularly don't give a damn what Jordan wants to post on the front page. This is his website that he allows us to use. And remember, rules are meant for a small percentage of people in order to keep them in line.

 

[mafia_boy]

Wow, lucky him

Instead of being a smartass with the reply, how about you check out the threads where premium gets given away (it happens every so often) or get off your can and pay for a month, a year or lifetime premium and enjoy:

a) Supporting GTPlanet.
b) The extra forums you get to visit (like the infield, where it's a lot more civilised)
c) No More ad's!!

 

[Shigegaki]

^ agreed!!

 

[Dracwolley]

HELLO!! DOCTOR!! WAKE UP!!! I'm a (lifetime) premium member, so I don't get ad's. Have fun with your pop-up's.

Maybe it's just me, but I'm not premium, and I've never had ads. None at the top, bottom, sides, etc. I have them when I'm not logged in, but after that, poof. Maybe it's my browser (Safari 4, by the way, don't get on my case about this, it's actually blazing fast for me with no problems), but... hmm...

...perhaps I shouldn't have said anything...

 

[mafia_boy]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm not premium, and I've never had ads. None at the top, bottom, sides, etc. I have them when I'm not logged in, but after that, poof. Maybe it's my browser (Safari 4, by the way, don't get on my case about this, it's actually blazing fast for me with no problems), but... hmm...

...perhaps I shouldn't have said anything...

I admit when I used to use IE, I would have an ad for the PS2 back in the day pop-up everytime I went from the news to the forum section when I first logged on, but it only did it once a day. When I had Firefox it would block it out with the pop-up blocker and since getting premium I never saw it and I've changed to Chrome since then.

 

[Dracwolley]

Yeah. Safari's pop-up blocker works wonders. I almost forgot they even existed for a second there.

Well, I guess I'll just continue my ad-less forum browsing!

 

[Blitz187]

I dont understand what all the hub-bub is about in this thread... Jordan posted a "controversial" video on HIS news blog ON April Fools day. It was a JOKE to "celebrate" April Fools Day! Get over it people, I dont understand why this has to be taken so seriously. Just like Famine stated I doubt Jordan will be considering something similar next year now because some people feel offended right away. I agree with the "Jordan can do as he pleases" side because it is his site, made with HIS effort and HIS time. Not ours, we simply just used whats been created for us and we have to abide by HIS rules. Jordan's sandbox, Jordan's rules.... Didnt you guys learn anything in Kindergarten?

 

[the Interceptor]

The thing is ... this forum and this website are all about fairness. The forum is moderated quite strictly compared to other places, but it is moderated professionally. Everyone gets a chance and then another, but everybody is politely urged to follow the rules to make this a place everybody in the world can follow and participate in.

Now, looking at this situation, one can of course say "It's just the Internet, noone was hurt" and move on. But regarding the professionality of those who handle this place, it must also be valid to raise your hand and ask a question. I think that it was just fair of Rocker to bring this up. Whether it was good to make a thread for it or whether it would have been better to contact Jordan by PM is a different matter. I might add that Rocker stayed polite and explained himself even when he was ... "flamed" for what he did by a few members.

Regarding the organisational side of the matter, this is a pretty unique and likely very rare happening. According to the rules, everything is fine. The video in question was removed from the forums according to the AUP. Jordan's blog is a different entity and therefore doesn't need to follow those rules. And still, I would have spoken up too, had this happened to me. I now understand the difference between the cases and how they fit together, but it still feels odd to me. And I wonder whether there is a viable solution to prevent such things from happening ever again, given that it will ever occur again.

And I know that other operators of such a website would tell Rocker to 🤬 and 🤬. But I know that Jordan and the GTP staff are delicate enough to understand and respect the underlying problem and will deal with it accordingly. Also, it must be possible to do such a thing as a member of GTP without being ridiculed by others.

 

[Blitz187]

^^ Not quite sure if you were aiming that at me or in general...

It might not have been totally clear, but I was kind of referring to the flaming and nitpicking which followed Rocker's voicing of opinion. I am all for standing up for yourself and not being a push over. If you feel like youve been "ripped" off in some way I feel its ok to take action on that. Except here, the combination of making a public thread, in the wrong place to begin with and all the drama that followed was totally unnecessary imo. Rocker would have shown much more maturity by not making this thread, swallowing his pride and taking this to the PMs. From the few times I have spoken to Jordan, he has always been a helping hand and understanding. A simple PM his way would have saved Rocker the flaming and having to defend himself towards others. I dont know, I just find this thread a whole load of unnecessary drama based on a, imo, wrong decision by a forum user to make it a public issue. I also understand that its a bit obscure as to when the rule should be enforced and when not.... but that decision should be left over to GTP staff, since I find that they run this site very well already compared to some other forums.

 

[the Interceptor]

It was more of a general note I felt I had to get off my chest.

 

[Blitz187]

^^^ No worries... I offered you a reply with more insight to what I was trying to convey