New Zero-Tolerance Policy for Harassment

To be honest, I don't think extreme rules are so effective. Restricting the forum also makes it worse. I'd say offensive and hateful people should be dealt with seriously, and derailment too, but at the same time, having the freedom to talk on the forum in always needed, and being respectful and friendly towards other members is a must. This way, the community will be a better place to visit.

Yes, I was maybe a bit harsh earlier issuing you with a warning so quickly so my apologies for that one, but this is hardly the first time you have belittled a mapper in his own thread. That being said I absolutely agree with you that warnings should be handled in a professional manner and be written up in an offical way and PM'd to the user keeping it private. We will use this idea from now on in.

So you outright admit that the warning was harsh(uncalled for) and my supposed past offenses influenced your decision to give me a warning(bias) yet you won't repeal it.

Lol that's really what you got from this? A hugbox? It's your choice if you want to start hugging people, I'm not telling you to.

Not what i meant by 'hugbox'. I meant this:

A hugbox is a derogatory term for an environment, usually on the internet, in which a group with similar interests gathers to discuss topics in what they intend to be a safe, comforting, and confrontation-free environment.

Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hugbox

There's more than one mod, and there's no such thing as a non biased person. Its unrealistic to expect us to do this perfectly but we're going to try our best.

So you admit that bias could *potentially* influence whether a warning or ban is given?  That mods/admins could pull a random rule out of the planes of nonexistence and issue a warning for something like telling someone how to cheat on a map simply because of bias. A rule that was never mentioned beforehand.

So you admit that bias could *potentially* influence whether a warning or ban is given?  That mods/admins could pull a random rule out of the planes of nonexistence and issue a warning for something like telling someone how to cheat on a map simply because of bias. A rule that was never mentioned beforehand.

Just cos its not directly in rules doesnt mean its against rules. Clearly mapper doesnt want people to cheat in his map, so you disrespected his choice by telling people how to modify his script to remove something he has added



Zen gave warning for a good reason, but he said that it was wrong for him to be harsh, which means he didnt pull off a new rule, but apologies how he went with giving warning about one

Just cos its not directly in rules doesnt mean its against rules. Clearly mapper doesnt want people to cheat in his map, so you disrespected his choice by telling people how to modify his script to remove something he has added

By that logic a person asking a mapper to add or change a feature(in a nice way or not) that they put into a map would be considered not respecting their choice.

To be honest, I don't think extreme rules are so effective. Restricting the forum also makes it worse. I'd say offensive and hateful people should be dealt with seriously, and derailment too, but at the same time, having the freedom to talk on the forum in always needed, and being respectful and friendly towards other members is a must. This way, the community will be a better place to visit.

Your post just outlined the rules explained in the first post of this topic... we want people to be respectful and friendly... people who are hateful will be dealt with seriously... doesn't sound very extreme to me so I'm not sure what you are saying is wrong here.

Not what i meant by 'hugbox'. I meant this:

Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hugbox

Oh excuse me for not consulting urban dictionary for the definition of a term which sounded sarcastically made up. I don't think your definition changes my previous response.

So you admit that bias could *potentially* influence whether a warning or ban is given? 

This can't possibly be news to you.

That mods/admins could pull a random rule out of the planes of nonexistence and issue a warning for something like telling someone how to cheat on a map simply because of bias. A rule that was never mentioned beforehand.

One person's definition of respect may be different than yours. Zen admitted he was too harsh to you, just drop it and move on. You're making a mountain out of a mole hill, as usual.

I respect the rules for what they are. I follow the rules as people would expect me to bottom line is if you don't like this zero tolerance policy then don't visit ugx

Rule approved

So you outright admit that the warning was harsh(uncalled for) and my supposed past offenses influenced your decision to give me a warning(bias) yet you won't repeal it.

Uncalled for? No. You blatently went against the mappers wishes by pointing out how to remove the anti-cheat system put in place by the mapper. It was ignorant and arrogant. I am only admitting I was harsh to issue you the one and only warning you would be given without first pointing out your error, despite you obviously knowing what you were doing when you did it.

As for your past offenses, there is no "supposed" about them. You history on UGX has been colorful. I will not bother listing some of them but you know fine well that you have been trouble on this forum on many occasions, as for the bias you can consider that to have been in your favour rather than against considering you are still a user on this site despite the previously mentioned history you have built up.

Don't play the victim here. Listen to Trem and just accept the apology.

Rule approved

Oh W1NG3D commented in a topic, everybody make a wish! 

Guys Guys Guys.I do not understand this feedback its not like its the end of the world here i out of all people  respect this rule in many ways and it stops savages like this happening to a user on this forum for example steviewonder87. As trem said u can express Ur feelings in a mature manor but don't go overboard.overboard. Dont start hating.I am sure that trem has good enough explanation for adding the new rule so what is there to complain about that? All i can see here is trem and the ugx staff are trying to make the forum a less violent and aggressive place.Plus its not gonna affect people in a major way its just telling those who needed to be told to quiet down a bit and respect the staff and members of this board

Completely on board with these rules and the zero tolerance policy. Save the Drama for High School guys...

I love how its the same typical people, making the same completely irrational typical arguments on a topic created solely to try to make things "better", and before even giving it a chance...

Just makes me think of cartman on that episode of south park


This is in no way going to "restrict" what people do here, just stop the hate and insults... If to be "unrestricted" we have to allow people to be as cruel and negative as they please, then i dont really see the need to have moderators "at all". This is infact - not a battle field, or a "enter at your own risk" environment and "its the internet" changes nothing ( I deal with this retarded logic on a regular basis at work with "the customers always right" meaning they can just "decide" whats correct or incorrect, regardless of the facts ), and certain people need to start remembering that

If businesses and debates can be run successfully without this nasty-ness, so can a forum. Hell debates on Racism and Feminism turn out more controlled than some events ive seen here ( like people thinking they have the right to "review" everything, and actually believe they are "helping" the mapper? If the mapper wanted your review, he would ask, and a negative review "on his topic", is the furthest thing from helpful. If you wanted to help, you would PM, or at least post it somewhere other than the release topic... a bug mention - sure, a 1/100 review... just no... ) The fact we are on the internet is irrelevent, and that very argument is the reason people are reguarly being arrested now for the vile abuse they post online, for example, a recent incident with a MP in the UK, recieving rape threats. Just sayin "its the internet deal with it" is not going to work, some people even kill themselves when it gets that bad...

No person can be completely unbiased, thats why we are a team. Therefore anything can always be discussed again, and decisions reviewed. But at the time, you guys need to learn that when your told to stop, you need to stop

Ill withstand the rest of what I would like to say, in support of this new, completely fair, and completely deserved rule and desperately hope certain people will at least give it a chance rather than come immediatly dump all over it and point out every possible "what if" scenario. How about actually giving it a chance first? You may be surprised

By that logic a person asking a mapper to add or change a feature(in a nice way or not) that they put into a map would be considered not respecting their choice.

But see thats not what happened they asked the OP how too change it, and "YOU" not the original uploader, added the way too cheat. The OP made the map specifically too not allow cheating, but "YOU" openly posted how too remove that, too the release thread. If i were the OP i would hve been pretty annoyed. A PM would have been just as effective and you probably wouldn't have gotten that warning in the first place. And if the guy can't receive or send PM's yet then don't post it at all.

oh and back on topic i like this new rule. though i do tend too go full retard on accasion ill try abide by these rules when i can.

well, finally i would say