Hi SG,

We're adding a couple of new guidelines to the site due to recent concerns within the community. This change adds the following to the list of content that is not allowed.

  1. Terrorism. Supporting terrorist groups, terrorist acts, or celebrating attacks by terrorist organizations.

  2. Sensitive subjects or events. Content regarding sensitive subjects (e.g. politics, religion, sexuality) or sensitive events with significant social, cultural, or political impact (e.g. public health emergencies, terrorism and related activities, conflict, or mass acts of violence) that we believe are facilitating a hostile and divisive environment throughout our community. At the moment we will be closing discussions pertaining to...

    • Israel-Hamas war
    • Russia-Ukraine war

Regarding the first point, if we interpret your content as supporting a recognized terrorist organization then it will be removed or the discussion will be closed.

As for sensitive subjects or events, we'll look at those on a case-by-case basis to see how they're currently being handled by users in the community. Are conversations about a certain subject or event frequently regressing into hostility between the participants? Is the content the source of an unusual amount of conflict throughout the site? If we identify a sensitive subject or event that is causing such a problem, we will first try to use our existing guidelines to keep the conversation civil. In exceptional cases where this proves to be ineffective or infeasible, we will consider adding the subject to the list above. We will moderate items on the list by closing existing discussions along with new ones that attempt to bring the subject back into the spotlight. We may also need to remove comments if a user is trying to shift the focus of an existing discussion to these subjects.

We want SG to continue being a welcoming place to both new and existing users and I think the new additions above are important in helping us maintain that atmosphere.


Edit: The sensitive subjects or events guideline mentioned above has been revised based on community feedback. Please read more about the changes.

1 year ago*

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm concerned by the long-term implications of this. Sure, banning thread that support or justify terrorism is perfectly reasonable, no complaints about that one. But I'm not so sure of what the second rule is gonna mean for this community in the long run.
As other users have already pointed out there's a risk that the LGBTQ+ threads or religious celebrations end up being considered inappropriate simply because of their inherently "political" nature, same goes for trying to address health or public emergencies, or discussing things that are vaguely controversial to some. Or maybe even threads talking about video games themselves with an intense political component, because those are a thing despite what some may claim, could be seen as stepping over the line.
I was in agreement that something had to be done to keep the war-related threads on a leash, maybe putting them in their own category out of the way, maybe suspending anyone who wasn't willing to be civil about it or showed fanatical tendencies, but just excising them completely from the forum doesn't seem like the right move. At least their existence kept those subjects mostly contained within them, preventing the shitstorm from spreading and taking over the forum. Not to mention that sometimes they truly held an actual value as sources of information, maybe not because they were any more accurate than other sources online, but rather because it was a chance to see the biases held by those "reporting" more clearly than usual since people here are usually much worse at masking their true stances than what you might see in more professional environments or the shouty nonsense of social media. The BS was laid bare here, it was easier to navigate around it. Interpolating some kernel of truth was a bit less hard. But I digress.

I'm aware that what we say here and now is ultimately just a drop of water in a bathtub, hardly making any splash or difference, that we don't really have much sway over the destiny of this site as we're little more than guests. But I'm disappointed regardless, for I expected a more measured response to this perceived "crisis". What would happen if or when the world truly goes to shit? Are we meant to just smile and pretend as if everything is fine just because this is a "gaming" forum? As if we weren't adults here, as if hobbies were completely insular parts of our lives that never interacted at all with the other stuff going on in our day to day, are we gonna be forbidden to talk about the "touchy" things in our lives because some part of the community thinks it's inappropriate somehow? Isn't that kinda immature, or at least lacking empathy?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

"Regarding the first point, if we interpret your content as supporting a recognized terrorist organization then it will be removed or the discussion will be closed."

you wasted all your words in vain.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

How so? I said I agree with the first point, it was in fact the very first thing I clarified, it's the second one that makes me worry about it's potential implications.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

worry not
there no bots monitoring comments 24/7
i think that they will close thread if there will be too many reports and too many comments
just use common sense, no emotions

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

What are you even answering to this time? This doesn't even feel like a conversation, you're just saying stuff that's barely relevant to what I originally said.
Please, at least try to follow some sort of back and forth.

I didn't mention bots, nor talked about moderation directly, my concerns are about the spirit of the new rule. It's far too vague, while simultaneously being too restrictive, it has the potential to be used as a blunt weapon to prevent any discussion of a subject that a loud minority disapproves of. It's in essence a gag order, a tool to be abused by those with bad intentions, it actively gives power to the trolls by tipping the scales in their favor. There's a difference between shooting down a thread that has turned into a shitshow or suspending bad actors the moment they start behaving inappropriately and doing a blanket ban of everything that can be considered even remotely "sensitive".

Do you really not see the risks?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

calm down, you should take some sedatives and didn't use emotions.

you panicking to early and exaggerating things (and making fuss) before anything happened at all

can you show any examples of how sg moderators use their power in a totalitarian manner and with ill intentions for last 8 years at SG?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It's not the moderators themselves that I'm worried about, is the fact that the moderation itself would be willing to bend over backwards to suit the demands of a few, which is essentially what just happened.

And I am taking this calmly, but not with apathy. There's a difference between allowing oneself to be overtaken by emotions, which to be fair I can't prove I'm not doing because this is is a text-only communication after all, and to simply be firm and treat things with what I consider to be an appropriate degree of urgency and intensity. It's also just the way I usually express myself even when I'm perfectly calm, you could say that it's my manner of speech to be somewhat pessimistic and a bit dramatic for effect, some think I'm angry but this is just how I speak... minus the most obvious giveaways that I'm not really angry like the tone of my voice and body language that as I said are lost in here, because text.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The controversial thread that kicked all this off had a senior mod step in and state the content was violating copyright law of all things. A junior mod, I believe a month or two ago, was trolling a user for something along the lines of being 30 years old and living with his mother. This site absolutely needs to worry about moderation whether it's transparency or actionable enforcement of clearly defined rules/guidelines.

I believe sensitive subject matter can have a place here to be discussed, but the current state of moderation isn't ready for it. I mostly lurk around the forums and compared to more active users I'm sure this will be an unpopular opinion but, better to just not allow said content if the resources aren't there to keep the bad actors and trolls in line.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I believe sensitive subject matter can have a place here to be discussed, but the current state of moderation isn't ready for it (...) better to just not allow said content if the resources aren't there to keep the bad actors and trolls in line.

Basically this.

I don't know about the specific cases you mentioned, but I do know tbat that the level of moderation required to keep those heated discussions rolling smoothly is very much unrealistic. Drawing a harsh line like this is (unfortunately) the best alternative.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I won't mention specifics because it involves rules and guidelines being established and refined that are far beyond what I, as a simple user, am here for. I also believe it's a borderline call out and these kinds of issues should be handled internally as far as I'm concerned at least.

As for the banned topics, i agree, it is unfortunate but it's also likely the most manageable option available. I know it will rub a lot of folks the wrong way because of strong belief in open discussion or freedom of expression, etc. It is what it is. In a world more polarized than ever.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm aware that my opinion on what would be ideal is probably unpopular and might even be unrealistic, but I'm gonna share it anyway since otherwise it seems like I'm asking for moderators to constantly patrol the forum comment by comment.
I think we need some sort of special tag for truly sensitive subjects, something that clearly communicates that if you're participating in that discussion you do it at your own risk, and give the mods the ability to shove threads into that category if they see fit, with some subjects like war getting instantly moved to that category as soon as a mod sees them and with a day suspension for the creator for not using the right category from the start. This tag should be easy to hide for the users that don't want to see these touchy subjects.
And now for the likely most controversial part of my idea, mods should have free range within those "unfriendly" threads, if a user so much as makes a single questionable comment they can get suspended for up to a week, mods can be as trigger happy as they want in there, but only in there. If a user doesn't want to run the risk they should simply not comment there or be extra careful with their wording. That way freedom of opinion still exists but if you step in the tornado don't complain when a tree falls on top of you. Basically forceful politeness when talking about subject matter that can easily cause a riot.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I used to manage a number of pages on social media. The owner and I grew her brand(s) from tens of thousands of users to nearly a million over the course of a few years. The struggle to moderate content, people, growth, and advertisement was monumental to say the least.

Despite carefully curating almost every aspect of the operation, we still got hit during a purge the tech company started in order to combat scrutiny(this was in a time where misinformation was becoming rampant and people were creating media in bad faith,) which also conveniently allowed the company to gain a foothold into the monetary side of things. We never got a clear answer but we believe a brand we loosely associated with in one of our growth strategies was negligent in the way they operated and as such we were caught in the crossfire. Sadly, we weren't the only collateral either and some of those affected managed much larger communities.

Now, I'm not trying to draw any parallels here. These are two very different beasts and SG is far less draconian in how it operates, but there are two things I learned from the experience that I feel are relevant to the current situation at least.

The first being that users are beholden to the terms and conditions of the platform and these may change at anytime, often to the detriment of the user and benefit of the platform. Sometimes it is to prevent controversy, or perhaps to make the site ad-friendly, etc. The second thing being the easiest solution to a problem is often to prevent the problem in the first place.

As much as having separate categories that can be hidden or differing tiers of moderation sound good on paper. It's going to be a lot less work to simply not allow certain subjects to be discussed. I wouldn't want to be the admin having to deal with this headache right now but I also empathize with the userbase that is losing the ability to speak about certain topics because a few have ruined it for the many.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I know, I'm not so naive as to not realize that this was a lost battle from the very moment that an announcement was made, a handful of people with questionable (likely harmful from the start) intentions ruined it for everyone else. There's no point in trying to argue once something is done.
But still, I had to take the opportunity to make my stance clear, to shout at the crowd while I still can and while it's still relevant. What would be the point of lamenting the negative consequences of what started here today at some nebulous point in the future when the results are clearer but it's too late to complain?
I'm sad to admit that I have more of an emotional attachment to this site than what I'd like, I spent nearly ten years visiting this site almost daily, and since I'm currently 33 that's almost a third of my life, and most of my adult life. I grew too used to the relative stability of this place and the general civility of its community and now I feel betrayed, despite the fact that I should have known that there were no promises of the status quo remaining as it was forever, I naively thought that this site was less likely to ever go through a major shift simply because it didn't belong to any major corporation nor had monetary gain as its main objective. I guess I expected it to remain roughly as it was just because it was someone's personal pet-project, it really felt like one of the last bastions of the old internet I grew up with, back before ads restructured every single digital place into a sterile flat space of profit-oriented regurgitation.
I really was a naive idiot, wasn't I? Guess it's time to give up and move on, I'll probably still be able to squeeze enjoyment from this site for some more time regardless, it's not like my standards are particularly high anyway and they only get lower with age.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You're not naive, nor an idiot. We can leave at any time but it's also up to all of us to shape the content here to the extent we're allowed. Folks have been fairly civil with a few outliers in the time I've been here, so it's sad to see the events across the globe shifting the energy in this forum in such a negative way.

I've enjoyed taking part in community projects such as Lonely Quarantine Days back when Covid hit to any number of trains and seasonal/holiday festivities over the years. I've learned a lot while reading and interacting here too. We're seeing things recently that require change to keep everything on the level, but hopefully folks won't let it sour their overall experience.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

do not let people spread seeds of hate between each others
it will lead only to hate with no end and bitter end without saving anything and anyone

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I see a lot of arguing in this thread, so I want this thread closed under the new guidelines because it's content is about a sensitive subject that is facilitating a hostile and divisive environment throughout our community!

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Your are one of those that scream "ban cars" when someone talks about gun rights. -_-

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You just didn't understand what I was doing :)

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Made me laugh +1. At this point this thread is divided enough in terms of opinions and people are disagreeing with each other that we can call it a sensitive subject indeed and it should qualify to close the thread.

I feel for cg for trying to maintain a "community", but we have always been a divided one in terms of opinion. Whatever subject you give us, we can make it divisive enough to close the thread.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Hi AmanoTC, as noted in the description, we're only currently closing topics created to discuss the Israel-Hamas war and Russia-Ukraine war. New subjects will not be added to the list without us carefully considering the impact on the community. We have other guidelines, like the one pertaining to threats, harassment, and slurs to help keep topics civil and to prevent trolling.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

lol. ukraine thread was created almost two years ago and the palestine one was created just one week ago. i didn't even had enough time to know better about the sides of this specific subject. anyways, this is your site and you don't need to create good intentions to do whatever you feel like you want to do. just go straight "i don't like this" and that's it. you don't need to sacrifice everything else to create a balance that wasn't needed before.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

we're

we... we??, cmon, stop telling lies, you lazy admin.

"my mods are"

fix that description, give those men the merit you've never give.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Hey icaio, you seem to have a strong opinion about the guidelines, but I'm not exactly sure what it is and I would like to hear it. Could you share some specifics about how you would prefer to see discussions and controversial comments about the wars moderated? Tossing insults my way isn't necessary and it's not accomplishing anything.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

now you also see insults coming your way? and where's the insult... lazy? not an insult. you are lazy so much. you don't care about us. you don't care about Mods: never never cared about mods, you lazy administrator of a site you don't even care, say it, be honest.

step down, give us a new real actual factual admin, not a greedy lazy bud that only cares about Fanatical referral links.

my strong opinion is about you and how you're killing our community. couldn't care less of guidelines. see? you know very very very well the needs of your users. you know everything happening in this forum. you're always here. how PRO you are.

step down!

for SG.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Maybe it is a translation issue but you sound indeed very rude and insulting in both of this posts.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Maybe it is a translation issue

it isn't

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Why not stop being lazy yourself and make your own site? I hear it is quite easy with Squar... Never mind, you'd don't really care enough about others to do the work.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I don't want to write so "loaded" as icaio, partly because i am ill right now with fever and puking and don't have the energy for all that i would like to write, but i think too, that you don't care for the work that other ones do. Mods and Users.

You could handle the GIGANTIC autojoiner problem, as you done it 3? years ago.
Serversided, with not much effort.
But instead you let the mods and users invest thousands of hours to battle the autojoiners 1 by 1 (so in the end in a worse quality as server sided would be possible).

I sended the mods, and they sended it to you, a shady ru store tracker, where you would be able to add the listed games from there to the reduced cv list or at least a automatic message to the mods, that they can look into game XYZ and add it to the reduced/no cv list.
This was 4? years ago. Nothing happened. (One staff member of my group programmed something that claimed the tracker infos, and from other stores, he done the basic stuff in 3 days and after 7 days he added all quality of life stuff. And he were only a programmer in education, so i, strongly, assume you could do it much faster)
I spend thousands of hours to help the site and had as reward, often, blacklists because i clearly write that right now more as 50% of the active users use autojoiners.

I fully understand icaios position of frustration because a good bunch of the ones that helped the site have it. And the most of us stopped to help the site because you block all things that could make the site better for the mods and the users, because you are the only admin and don't do the server sided/programming job that would be needed.
You do nearly nothing, if it don't bring you more income, that is the fact for the last 6 years, since i am on this site. And yes, this is very frustrating, special when i think on all the lifetime that i wasted till i realized this fact.

It's your site, and of course it is your right to handle it how you like, but you can't be surprised when "the community" isn't happen and some, over years, build up frustration explode at some time.

Maybe you should take a few days to think about my words and maybe you can take then the critic and try to help the mods, value their invested lifetime more and try to help them with the tools etc. that they need.

Ps.: That military conflicts discussions get closed is a good change. That, at least, one of the creators of this threads, that posted NSFL gore links (the extremest stuff) don't got suspended is a bad joke (and show a bad moderation of the involved high mod). That the same user created a new discussion with the same content and redacted only the NSFL stuff and still had NSFW gore links in the thread and again not got a suspension is absolutely not tolerable. The gore rule existed, the user known about the rule and don't cared, he decided that we (the community) must see killed, tortured people because he wanted that. I am here to have fun and to relax, not to see such stuff and it is ugly that some users have a "protection" and can break rules multiple times without to get a suspension.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I support this decision. Some people showed no constraint and started dehumanizing entire races and posting gore content.
There are places like reddit and X for political propaganda.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Unfortunately i agree with your opinion (that's a way to say it :p )

Don't we need all a safe place, a stopover on the path of life where everyone is welcome ?
If people wanna fight there are many websites for that. Would you life the full internet to be a battlefield ?
You need a safe place to make peace and not only to make war. Peace with your opponent and peace within yourself.
And when you're tired to fight, need some comfort, all come back 'cause you know this website is here for you (or you opponent too).

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Mission accomplished.
As I told you a few posts before, now you see how easy your poorly worded new rule can be misused in the future, because it is formulated way to vaguely and can be applied to anything someone doesn't like.
You opened Pandora's Box with that rule.

I understand what you're trying to do, but you have to be very, very careful how you're wording this, otherwise you will achieve the opposite of what you want.

P.S.: Let me help you out. There are two major flaws with the wording.
A) The word "sensitive". This is subjective, because what is sensitive to one person is not sensitive to another person.
B) The wording "...that we believe are...". Again, subjective, because we can not read your minds and from now on, we have no idea before posting anything if any of you believe that what we post is against this rule.

Rules need to be objective, like laws, there has to be as little wiggleroom as possible. They need to be formulated clear, coherent and precise so that everyone understands what is and isn't allowed without any interpretation neccessary.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I hope you do not mind that i add to your points some more.
My concerns regarding this change are in line with yours but two additional ones below are part of this concern as well.

C) the wording ...closing existing discussions along with new... not just the subjective sensitive one, even past and future ones regarding said subjective sensitive decided topic.
D) the wording ...being a welcoming place to both new and existing users... to be a welcoming place you need to be able to exchange yourself with others. SG members are all around the world so the view on how a life should be lived is not the same across the whole user base so drama can happen simple by not knowing every way of live on this planet.

Due to A, B, C there are now tools in place that can potentially kill any past/present/future discussion on a subjective decission.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It's cool that it give rules against harassment and such stuff.
My, only, harassment user report ticket is open since 24th july 2019.
If now someone want more details about all the stuff you can be sure that i can't deliver it in the same quality as 2019.

Did you think that it give theoretical a rule against harassment or did you think that such stuff get handled practical would help ?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You're the person at town halls no one likes

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You also didn't understand what I was doing :)

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Fair enough, I got wooshed

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I agree with 1, dont agree with 2. It opens doors to subjective censorship. If you think what could be sensitive it can become overused only because some troll will be making shit storms. Best way would be to give functionality to hide particular topic on forum + ban trolls. I did not participated in these discussions but I am against censorship if not necessary. But anyway Sg site has right to sets own rules (as I have right to disagree).

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I get the intention, but I don't like it. SG forums have always been a relatively open place where people could discuss all kinds of different including controversial topics. As far as I can tell most of the behavior in question has been confined to specific topics. People who only want to discuss gaming or their cat or whatever can easily avoid those topics.

The second guideline seem arbitrary enough that discussions could get shut down if someone deems it "sensitive". And let's be honest, activity on the forums here has declined significantly enough over the past few years without banning any topic that someone might deem hostile.I think this is just going to further that by creating a sterile, dead forum.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I want to point out that my post talking about the October 7th terror attack has also been locked based on this new rule.
Despite the comments there having no controversy whatsoever!

The only thing people were arguing about in the comments, was if posts about non-gaming subjects should be on SteamGifts or not.
(and the fact that in the latest posts window you see posts from categories you're not subscribed to - which I agree is a major bug in the way discussion categories work)

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Now you're just instigating.

CG made it quite clear he doesn't want topics like Israel-Palestine, Ukraine-Russia, and if you draw the line further you would get Kosovo-Serbia, China-Taiwan, etc. The Hamas attacks are literally related to the Israel-Palestine conflict, so your topic being locked under the new rule makes perfect sense.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

My topic wasn't political, it was humanitarian.
I did not voice my opinion in any matter.
I simply stated a series of facts, and then backed each of the facts with evidence.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Your thread did qualify as it was about one of those 2 subjects. Also, I'm pretty sure you were a big part of why these rules were made by the way, since you posted that much gore in the main link, regardless if you made another thread and edited out the links but left the video names in there, still doesn't make it up that you did that first thread.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

that we believe are facilitating a hostile and divisive environment throughout our community

As I mentioned, unlike other threads, there were divisive or hostile comments in the thread I opened (except general comments about it being non related to gaming)

Also my post was not political or opinionated. It was purely factual.
I stated a series of facts, and then backed each of the facts with evidence.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Probably the reason your thread got people angrier is because even the other guys thread didn't post gore so you just had to 1up everyone and do the thing you shouldn't do, and so naturally everyone was like wtf now we're posting gore huh. The ukraine thread didn't post the kind of content you posted either although it had nsfw content. You'll find gore on any side of war, always. Every side has those videos, you posted those to strengthen yours. Factual or not that it happened, these things happened on both sides in any war, and you know it very well.

You weren't supposed to post gore here, most people would assume that's self explanatory.

As for it being political, I think it was political enough. Factual or not information, as once again those kind of atrocities happened on both sides, you were clearly advocating for one side strongly, although you are entitled to your opinions. But it didn't get closed necessarily for simply being political, but for "Sensitive subjects or events. Content regarding sensitive subjects (e.g. politics, religion, sexuality) or sensitive events with significant social, cultural, or political impact (e.g. public health emergencies, terrorism and related activities, conflict, or mass acts of violence) that we believe are facilitating a hostile and divisive environment throughout our community." as cg has commented at the bottom of your closed thread.

Just because you post facts, doesn't make it okay to post gore. I'm sure if you looked you would be able to find facts of people suffering from the other point of view too. Facts alone don't mean enough, nor do they justify breaking the rules.

TLDR: You broke the rules, specifically rule 2. "Inappropriate content. If you are posting content that may be considered NSFW (not safe for work), prefix any links or images with a NSFW tag to warn others. Do not post pornography, or explicit content, such as real life images depicting severe injury, gore, or death.". Of course these videos felt impactful to you or others as they weren't at the same level as the other threads. The palestine threads showed blurry images, the ukraine one maybe had some explosions but never anything close. You had to post gore to support your pov, although if you went on telegram, liveleak or twitter you'll find much worse of both sides on both wars, or if you want you'll find much worse completely unrelated to the two events.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Probably the reason your thread got people angrier is

No one got angrier because of Mdk25's thread. It's only you and some terrorist supporters who got angrier. Normal people got angrier because of the Hamas thread.

Everything is simple. A troll created a thread that supported terrorists, and his thread lasted for a week or more, although it was reported many times by many people. In his thread, brave "Hamas fighters" bravely fought against cruel murderous occupants. And it was TOTALLY OK with cg and the mods.

Someone had to create a thread that showed the truth. Mdk25 took upon himself this arduous task. He complied a ton of evidence. All normal people were grateful to him. Yes, he broke a rule, and the thread was closed within 24 hours. But that was it. Rule broken - thread closed - problem solved.

Don't look for a problem where there isn't one. A mod explains the real problem here:

This should be a case study of how one Hamas troll managed to cripple and manipulate an entire site to suit his needs

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm sure it got more reports for it's gore, hence why it was closed before it could get a second page of comments lmao. It's not just me, for your reference, I haven't reported a single user or thread regarding the subject as I too believe in freedom of information, although I did find it stupid he had to post gore, because as I had already explained, if you do a basic search you can find plenty of it on both sides, also on both sides of the rus-ukraine war, also unrelated to war. Just because you post some gore doesn't make your point stronger. At least the palestine thread had the decency to not break the rule and post that, regardless if you disagreed with the threads views.

And no it's not as simple as you say it is, and the thread wasn't called that and wasn't focused on supporting hamas or maybe I just didn't see that, maybe I don't consider every palestinian a hamas terrorist. You're associating which is your opinion, you're entitled to it, but it expressed it's concern for palestinians in overwhelming majority, to a fault which I pointed out as palestinians themselves are stubborn and weak people in this situation using themselves as shields for no good reason, although the thread it clearly expressed it's dislikeness towards what israel was doing in retaliation, which was contradictory for many reason for which it's pointless to reopen the topic. Bottom line don't create lies and illusions as to what that thread was titled and what the entire thread was. Sure it was deflecting from the blame by using tactics as such, or maybe I just missed said comments, can't say I read everything in there but I replied to a few things so maybe I processed the information differently.

As for it being "TOTALLY OK with cg and the mods.", it clearly wasn't if it didn't even last what 2 weeks or whatever? Maybe they were looking for the best approach to the topic with the least damaging impact, you can't expect them to do it in 5 minutes and be like cool ban that one. Also maybe they expected it too cool down like the ukraine thread did, but obviously people weren't civil enough in the end. Of course it made no sense to leave your thread up and close that one, because yours was just as opinionated as the other one, so they would've censored one specific side, which would have been far worse. They were both strongly biased towards one single team, rather than cover both realms as news information.

"Someone had to create a thread that showed the truth." This truth you say was obvious from the start, hamas attacked first so clearly they were gonna get spanked by israel afterwards, so we knew what happened, you could've seen vids on plenty of websites if you so wanted. It wasn't the place for gore, end story, stop trying to justify it, it's literally rule 2 on the website, you don't even have to get bored to read to like rule 7 or something. Also, as I mentioned like 5 times now, you will find gore videos of either side. Not sure what I have to repeat myself and why you keep avoiding this, maybe this bothers you because you wish that's all it was, just videos from the hamas side, and 0 videos on the israel side. mdk posted only one sides gore videos, that's political and biased. Truth or not, the other side also has gore truth videos, they aren't fabricated lies, they happened and you can find them on the same platforms that hosted the other ones. Because on telegram, twitter, liveleak at least that information is available to see from both angles, not just one. Also, you should've considered with US showing support for israel that some of the videos from the israel side will get censored as to not damage us reputation even more, but you might've not considered that.

As for Xarabas`s comment, I don't agree, for the obvious reason that the userbase was divided on the subject. Just because they don't fully support his opinion doesn't mean they're some brainwashed users, but this is part of the reason I don't like xarabas anyways. "Suit his needs" is an interesting thing to say, because whatever we say or do here is irrelevant to the situation at hand. Kinda like those harvard students who go outside their class with a rag that says something about the topic. It's cute, but doesn't do anything and it wont save lives or prevent this in the future in that area.

The palestine thread had users pointing out mistakes made by both parties. I even pointed out the many mistakes made by palestine myself. But heck, then there's a 2009 video out there where the israel prime minister netanyahu says that israel giving money to hamas is part of keeping palestine divided, so they are at least partially responsible for creating the problem because they disliked palestinians so much they willingly gave funds to terrorists for them to gain more power over palestinians. Then someone else showed a great video with stats of what Jews think of non jews, including tourists btw who have no rights there for instance according to a law, law which extends to palestine. So the tension has been there for many years. Of course it will never justify for what happened, but to act like the other side is an angel, and for it to not be okay to post their mistakes along the way, is a little interesting.

If you want to discuss this topic with me though feel free to add me and I'm willing to talk it out as long as you can keep an open mind. I'm mostly in support of israel in this situation, and of course I don't support hamas, but I don't believe every palestinian is a terrorist because of what happened.

This all just furthers my point though, in that everyone here gets to push their own agenda in such topics, be it crazy, or mdk, or whoever, and because they are the posters they limit the information in the main thread as they wish, which is why you had two threads taking 2 very different sides, hence it only strengthens the reasons to block said threads because obviously said people can't make neutral threads to share the information, but they use them to push their agendas, crazy or mdk, or whoever else.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

All normal people were grateful to him.

Did you smoke something bad ?
Are on heavy meds ?
Have, serious, mental problems ?

I can't explain myself in a different way your sentence because NONE of the "normal people" were grateful for NSFL / NSFW GORE links to vids of killed, tortured etc. people.
None in my discord server, none in my group and none that i seen here on sg.

Someone that post such stuff and see it as "needed" and "ok" lost the reality.

Yes, he broke a rule, and the thread was closed within 24 hours. But that was it. Rule broken - thread closed - problem solved.

1st discussion opened that broke the gore rule, no suspension.
2nd discussion opened that broke the gore rule, no suspension.

Be sure that it isn't "case closed" with only a warning for this extreme rule breaks.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Jesus Christ what the fuck happened here in like a week. In the 4 years I've been here this has just been a tiny forum where people can discuss absolutely whatever with not many escalations (sure, there has been a few incidents, but nothing major tbh), hopefully this thing is just a weird spike in the statistics and things return to normal soon. I don't know how I feel about the guidelines but I hope they will only really be enforced when something completely flips out like this. The way it has otherwise been so far has been fine in my opinion.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Increase in members + increase in polarization == this situation.

This increase in polarization went in ultra fast mode (across all media platforms) for the past 10 years or something. Maybe the world did end in 2012 after all?

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Whoosh Whoosh

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

^this dude happened^

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I am here since 2012.....

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

And you had all those 11 years to sympathize with Palestine's. You suddenly started to feel sorry for them the day after the attack by Hamas.
Well done. You got your wish. Hate wins.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Hate always wins. It's so much easier than to see the big picture or to try to understand different motives.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yea yea whatever.... Pro-israeli supporters... i created the thread because of war not because of hamas attack keep assuming and keep people diverted from the genocide... i never asked people from ukraine thread to come over say useless toxic things they did those things willingly like they use to do in ukraine thread....breaking many SG rules as a result both threads got down....

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Like peterlol said you had 11 years but you never posted anything about Palestine, but you are not gonna explain that you are gonna deflect the conversation.

Also you are insulting the Palestines by saying or implying (doesn´t matter if you don't say it directly) that Hamas aren't terrorist and that Hamas is the same as Palestine.

Now answer whatever you, deflect to avoid giving answers, tergiverse what i say, misquote me or ignore parts. The thing is that you don't support Palestinians you are a pro terrorist (Hamas) that wants to see every jew erradicated, people if they can be called that purposely misinterpret the Quran and use it as an excuse for acts of terror.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Stop assuming i dont hate jews...jews now disowing israeli illegal occupants like muslims disown isis and taliban now. you can assume whatever you like but in judaism killing of innocent is not allowed so its nomore jew vs whatever u are trying to say....

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I never assumed you don't hate jews quite the opposite. The rest i have no clue what you intended to say.

What is clear is you never explained why in 11 years you never supported Palestines before, you never denied supporting terrorists (Hamas), and now you explicitly you said that you hate jews (which was obvious)

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It's obvious from the context that he's trying to say that "he doesn't hate Jews"

Y'all are collectively coming after this specific user as if he is the source of all evil. Like wtf.
I don't even agree with everything he says, but I can see that he is as emotionally charged and probably as young as others here that support Israel instead of Palestine, so I don't expect either side to be 100% objective and able to get the point across without being emotionally charged.
Yet no one is torching the others everywhere they go and comment in the forum.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

What context? the whole post i replied doesn't make any sense. And obvious why? because you don't think he would be sincere on purpose and it was just a Freudian slip?

The rest of what you said, can you explain the things that he never answered?

  • Why in 11 years he never supported Palestines before? Only after the terrorist attack.
  • He never denied supporting terrorists (Hamas)

If you can't explain those 2 points then i can't understand why you defend him if you don't agree with what he says.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

..jews now disowing israeli illegal occupants like muslims disown isis and taliban now. you can assume whatever you like but in judaism killing of innocent is not allowed so its nomore jew vs whatever u are trying to say

how is that not comprehendible to you? He's saying Jewish people disown Israel like Muslims disown ISIS and Taliban.
Basically, he is clarifying that he doesn't hate Jews, he's only voicing his opinions about the obviously problematic state of Israel.

As for the questions, I won't answer for anyone because that's not my job, but I can understand him being emotionally charged when many media outlets are taking sides instead of talking about the situation in an objective way.
And many of them justified Israel committing a genocide against Palestinian civilians. because Hamas did so and so.

At the end of the day, I don't think you, me or anyone else is cool with genocide no matter what the reason was and who the victim is.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Or you won't answer those questions because you can't and neither does he, that's why he always ignores that part.

look up genocide if you don'tknow what it means.

Putin kills ukranians but it's not genocide because he doesn't want to exterminate ukranians he just wants Ukraine to belong to Russia.
Israel isn't committing genocide either, they are defending themselves from terrorists and trying to free the hostages.
Palestine is not guilty of genocide because Palestine is a country and not a terrorist organization. Palestine != Hamas.
Hamas that's another story, it's a terrorist organization that wants to exterminate every single jew from the face of the earth, well excuse me but i think that sounds just a little bit like genocide.

You call media biased but you equate a country victim of a terrorist attack to a terrorist organization.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

As I said, I can't answer for other people so I don't know what you are on about there.
Because I assure you, this is NOT the first time I expressed my opinion about the Palestinian cause.

Oh right, so people are freeing hostages by carpet bombings these days? Yeah, that must be a super advanced method I haven't heard of yet.

I'm glad you said "Palestine != Hamas", because I don't know if you heard but even in places such as the West Bank where Hamas has no say or operation, Palestinians are getting killed left and right.
But back to Gaza and if we ignore the civilians deaths there and consider all of them were actually terrorists.
We'd still have more than 10 dead journalists so far and many of the ones that are still alive came forward and said that they were getting death threats and warnings on the phone from IDF officers for operating within Gaza and showing what the Israeli airstrikes are actually doing.
Not to mention the 20+ UN workers deaths, must be undercover terrorists as well.

Look up the full picture of the situation, then restudy and clearly understand what genocide is for yourself before lecturing others. Because last time I checked, only who is afraid of the truth targets journalists so specifically.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

As I said, I can't answer for other people so I don't know what you are on about there.

Then why you reply to me when i replied to CRAZY463708?

Because I assure you, this is NOT the first time I expressed my opinion about the Palestinian cause.

I was talking about CRAZY463708.

Look up the full picture of the situation, then restudy and clearly understand what genocide is for yourself before lecturing others. Because last time I checked, only who is afraid of the truth targets journalists so specifically.

I only targeted journalists in your imagination.

Funny, arent't you lecturing me? Answer me when you heard that Israel said that every Palestinian must be wiped from the earth, because Hamas does say so that about the jews.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I said why I replied to you in the first reply, in addition I managed to clarify the context about the Jewish people from his message that you got wrong due to his few typos.

Who said anything about you targeting journalists? Are you a member of the IDF that is doing the genocide against Palestinians, or did I miss something there?

Ok so if IDF does the genocide but doesn't declare it beforehand then it's ok? Aight that makes sense.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I said why I replied to you in the first reply, in addition I managed to clarify the context about the Jewish people from his message that you got wrong due to his few typos

Not clear to me you can explain me if you want. He said "don't assume i don't hate jews"that's not a typo. It's either a mistake and he said the opposite of whath he meant or a Freudian slip.

Who said anything about you targeting journalists?

Look up the full picture of the situation, then restudy and clearly understand what genocide is for yourself before lecturing others. Because last time I checked, only who is afraid of the truth targets journalists so specifically.

Maybe i misunderstood or maybe you phrased it poorly, but you mentioned it.

Ok so if IDF does the genocide but doesn't declare it beforehand then it's ok? Aight that makes sense.

I have no clue to what, to who or why you are replying this.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

he even said in his now closed thread, that he's pro-Hamas

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You can claim all you want. Rule number 1 is made because of you.
It is a good thing I believe very strongly in karma and not in god.
Karma is real and always a bitch. I am sure you will notice it sooner or later.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

One motivated troll happened, who used a gap in the rules that made possible to create a provocative political posts.
I do not feel that the rule changes are perfect, but at least they close that gap.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Really could have just banned the one person, locked that thread and everyone who have just moved on.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

He didn't break any rules. His idea was based exactly on existence of another topic, if freedom fighters can have a topic about their fight against terroristic force, he could create a similar topic, calling one side a "freedom fighters", opposite side - "terrorists", regardless of public opinion and real events, and be fine with the rules.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

"freedom fighters" don't kill babies. Lets stop trying to pretend this is even remotely similar to what Russia did. (I will not entertain you further)

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I agree, I just tried to explain the way he used the rules and the situation on the forum to avoid the moderators' actions.
Personally, we can only blacklisting such a person but it doesn't remove a topic from a view, that I checked.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Guys please,

Honestly this is a "giveaway/gaming" site not a Twitter, this site is supposed to be used to give away games, inform people of game giveaways/deals, and create "gaming or giveaway" "related" threads to discuss, create puzzles, trains and stuff like that.
This is not a site to share your political/religious/sexuality views or any other stuff that is unrelated to this site`s purpose..

If you want to discuss/argue about politics, religion, sexuality or anything else, there are sites and forums literally made for that, in which you will find a lot like-minded people who share your views and people with different views to argue/discuss with.

This site is called SteamGifts not (SteamRants, SteamPolitics, SteamAwareness...... and so on)

Let`s keep it simple how it was before,
Have a nice day/night to everyone!

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

As long as there is an OFF-TOPIC category in the forum, I don't understand this argument.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

why don't we just change this site into a bbc news clone site then if that is all people want this days?
'

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

This is the type of comment that makes it very difficult to have a meaningful discussion.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

but did you read any of those "meaningful discussion" threads it was all just the op sides with one side and they are the super best and the other lot are evil and even when people said otherwise they wouldn't listen to fact or reason - some discussion

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Again with the hyperbole. I highly doubt that 'all' of the content of those threads fits under a single description.

I ignored those threads for the most part.

That's what I do when I encounter something that I don't wish to engage with. I just ignore it. But I also accept its continued existence. Just because I don't wish to engage with it does not mean it needs to be banned. And if I happen to see it briefly, even though I am trying to ignore it, that's okay.

I see a lot of people driving around my town in cars with advertising on them -- company names, phone numbers, descriptions of services, etc.. I can't stand advertising on cars. But I don't write letters to the mayor of my town asking for a town ordinance banning advertising on cars. I accept that while I don't like it, it must serve a purpose for some people. So I'll ignore it, but it will continue to exist, and that's okay.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

i installed ESGST just so i could block seeing these threads and i wish i didn't have to but ads on cars and vans is just a normal way to advertise the company - i see them out ad about also but it doesn't bother me lie you get angry about it - also that is not forcing it's views on to someone and saying that because they started the thread they say 100% correct and what they say is the only way

edit: and if you mean why don't they just remove the people posting hurt comments? then just think how long that would take - it is long enough sometimes (if ever) to get a mod to resound as it is to nasty comments or in my case i saw some one win my giveaway back near when i started and then a few minutes later post it as a giveaway and i told them that is not allowed and complained and what was done - zero

The more work these mods have the less likely they will either stay as mods or even stay on this site - it would be even more a full time job than it is now (and not one that gets paid)

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You missed the point with your "product advertisement" analogy. It's one thing to spread awareness about a topic, and another to spread hate towards people you don't even know. That Ukro-Russia war thread spiraled into just people hating on anyone of Russian origin with the constant "orc this, orc that" comments. I mean, we even had a post where someone wanted every Russian SG user to be banned when the whole war began. I don't think we should support people acting like xenophobes, just like we wouldn't support racists, sexists, or homophobes. And because many people in that discussion weren't able to act civil and were simply spreading hate, the discussion was closed. Also, do note that mods have to look over all the material that was posted in that war thread. I don't think any mod who joins a mainly gaming oriented website with a forum expects to see that kind of material.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Because nobody asked for that, thank you for your question. It wouldn't be a good idea, nobody wanted it, and it would be a serious lack of understanding and a whataboutism to stifle any discussion if you meant it as a piece of argument.

People wanted isolated subforums. Filter tools. Actually banning investigators of chaos, not a poorly farted definition of what they may or may not allow in the future, depending on what mod finds it and if they had their coffee beforehand.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+1

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

want to talk about war go to the correct forum - i do understand that this is going to get a bit scary if mods start adding a whole bunch of words and topics to the naughty list - if they just let us remove seeing the threads we don't want in the first place it might have worked better?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I think it's okay to post and share those views. However, the reason the discussions were finally closed is because they weren't being used to spread awareness but hatred towards a certain group. That is something we should support, and I don't understand why people act as if all possibly divisive topics will be closed instantly. They will only be closed if people in them are acting like racists, sexists, or xenophobes towards people they don't know anything about. And don't mistake hateful people with trolls. One group only wants to get a reaction out of the person they are trolling; the other firmly despises anyone with anything from their "I hate strangers with these attributes" list.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm all for the changes. I care for each individual who is affected by these wars and have no guilt in them.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 1 year ago.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Bravo

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Instead of banning threads, it's better to ban trolls.

But hey, everything goes to hell everywhere so why would Steamgifts be any different

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

popular trolls don't get banned, they can make 10 users leave the site but nothing else may happen to them until is too late

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

i would love to see how this will gonna work in supportive bundles.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Add rules that provoke chaos in the future - yes.
Close topics, even those that exist for more than a year - yes.
Ban trolls - no.

Is this how you imagine ideal moderation? Shameful day for this forum.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I don't fully agree with the 2nd point but respect your decision

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Some ask for good reason the difference between Xmas or Aid with other threads.

I would say the difference is just state of mind.
For example when you make an advent calendar, you wanna share some happiness and comfort for everyone, and not only christians.
You're not proselytizing, you keep your religion to yourself. But you can share the chocolates. ;-)
It's a bit like the Red Cross (or Red Crescent), which comes to care medically for the unfortunate, not to convert them. The problem is if Red Cross deny care to a non christian, a Red Crescent to a non-muslim, here there would be a serious problem.
Similarly here you can find Secours catholique (catholic), l'armée du salut (reformist), secours populaire (atheist) and they are open to all the poors without distinction, they give you food without teaching you a lesson.

By the way, you could call the advent calendar "the winter calendar", and Xmas "winter feast for exchanging good intentions and gifts". Being from a christian culture, i don't see any problem with that if it can make it more inclusive. The christians will go to church or temple but it's their problem not yours. (Similarly i would prefer muslims here to share the good part to share humanity and not call to conversion.)
Yours is just to receive the chocolate and the gifts under the winter tree and it's really great as it is.

When you talk about war, you're expressing suffering, you need a place to express that suffering and that's understandable. But suffering often (and naturally) slides into anger. It's normal that you would have a place to express suffering and find comfort. But as soon as anger makes you point the finger at your enemy, it's like a christian or a muslim coming to convert you, not to share chocolates with you. And here is the problem.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

cg, here's a thought experiment for you.

Imagine a community where most people are peaceful law-abiding citizens, but there's a few guys who keep stealing cars and trying to run people over. These few people are causing chaos throughout the community. They should probably be in jail, but for some reason the police refuse to keep them in jail for more than a day.

As the community leader, your response is to...

Ban cars!

After all, if cars are banned, this group of troublemakers will not be able to steal cars and try to run people over anymore. Problem solved!

*

For those of you who were begging for this change, here's a different thought experiment.

Imagine you work for a company with 1000 employees in a large office building. Around lunchtime every day, 10-15 people go into a conference room and close the door. They can be seen through the glass, clearly it's a big discussion, and it seems like they might be getting pretty heated, but nothing they say can be heard outside of the room because of the soundproof walls. There's a sign on the door that says 'Sensitive Topic Area / Current Topic - The War in the Middle East'.

When you take your lunch break, you really just want to relax and not think about anything stressful. But... the conference room they're in is not relevant to your job, and you don't ever have to go into that room. None of the participants ever talk about any of the sensitive topics when they are outside of the room.

So you could just ignore this room, and the people in it... but instead, you decide that the very existence of this 'sensitive' conversation is offensive to you. You can't have people just going off on their own and having private conversations at lunchtime! Lunchtime is a time for relaxation! So you complain to management that all closed-door discussions should be banned at lunchtime.

Guess what? YOU are a bigger problem than the people in that room.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I didn't ask for the change, but won't oppose to it either.

But about your second interesting example, what if these people don't stay inside the room and ask to ban some workers from the canteen ?
Example that we've read sometimes :

Those horrible Russians shouldn't receive a gift, it's a good thing Fanatical region-locked to Russia, etc.

And not in the russo-ukrainian room, but for example in the Fanatical room, or in the "what about region-lock" room.

Then what, would you ban the Ukrainians who say that (those won't don't stay in the room) ? I wouldn't, they suffer an invasion. I think not all Russians are at fault. But i live very far so it's easy. They suffer directly, so obviously they think all are at fault. I want both of them on this website to receive gifts.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I have not seen the examples that you mention, but what you're describing is already against the site rules. So my very simple response is that there should be consequences for individuals that repeatedly break site rules, and there should be even stronger consequences for people who engage in hate speech.

First-time offenders get a warning. Then progress from there. Warning, progressive suspensions, then a ban if it becomes clear that the individual is just not capable of being a constructive member of the community.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Ah but you know, the people who receive bombs, they feel probably that it's not a big agression to prohibit others from playing.
I would like to keep all these people on this beautiful boat with all of us (there are sharks in the sea :p) !

But anyway i respect your point of view, even if i would prefer nobody to be banned i don't know the best way to keep a solid community, just the time or the experience can tell and i don't have the experience.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I would like to keep all these people on this beautiful boat with all of us !

I agree! But it's each individual's choice. The boat has rules. Follow the rules of the boat, you get to stay on the boat. Break the rules of the boat, you don't get to stay on the boat.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

On SG the community is worldwide and with that, stances regarding life are different.
With this in mind almost every topic can be a sensitive matter but it can also be a learning experience for people who are open minded.
The community forms through discussions without it there is no community.

What is seen as sensitive will be decided on a case by case basis from now on.
So instead of getting rid of the people who intentionaly stir up trouble or beginning to use words in ways that degrades an entire group of people or worse, the guideline was updated to get rid of any discussion in which the trouble happend as well as every previous or future discussion related to the same topic.
With this SG does not stay a welcoming place or will be a more welcoming one, as the "ill" minded people are still there.
It will potentialy just get quieter and quieter until there is barely more then a game exchange platform left.

From my point of view this all ready happend in the past.
When i started using this side there where topics every day worth reading.
Nowadays there is hardly anything worthwhile and with less worthwile things to read the perceived amount of "ill" minded arguments are more common as well because the "ill" minded are still part of the community.

But regarding to your metaphor make the boat a cruise ship so you can leave the people at ports around the world to leave and venture forth. No need to feed someone to the fishes ;)

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Hmm i don't decide anything anyway, but you make a point : it makes sense that the rare problems are more visible in a silent environment.
If it becomes too silent in the future, maybe there will be a balancing.

You don't want to feed the fishes ? Poor fishes.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

If anything, banning the Ukraine thread will make the problem worse. People won't have a thread to discuss new developments related to this war, so they will go to other threads.

I, for one, was amazed at how completely civil Steamgifts could remain given the large number of Russian, Ukrainian, and Eastern European users here. These user groups have extremely strong opinions on the war. And they all managed to lock themselves almost exclusively into the Ukrainian thread, except for a few isolated incidents that you describe. An incredible community... one that the new rules are destroying.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

That's right, i agree the incidents were very rare outside, but i didn't go inside these threads, so i will just trust you about what happened there ! ;)

We will see how that develop in the future anyway, if these new rules improve or make it worse for everyone.
CG is the captain of the boat in the end.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You just managed to articulate really well what I was struggling to put into words earlier today, thanks for your service to this ongoing discussion.
I think I'll go to pass out sleep now.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I know what you're trying to say, but these thought experiments tend to over simplify situations. To use your example, sure, we get the occasional criminal wearing a bright orange prison outfit trying to run people over. They're easy to identify. However, we also get hundreds of citizens that keep driving their cars as close to pedestrians as possible without hitting them. They're causing pedestrians to become annoyed and many of the pedestrians don't like walking in the city any longer. If we try to ticket the drivers, they claim they didn't actually hit anyone and technically stayed within their lane boundaries.

I'm not saying you're wrong. It is a little frustrating though when people act like moderating thousands of comments about a polarizing war is a trivial task though. Attempting to do such a thing will be very time consuming and it'll create lots of conflict as people attack one another and the moderators for their decisions. It will redirect a considerable amount of resources from other aspects of the site. You also have to consider who is going to be reviewing all of the images and videos of people being brutally killed. People came here to take part in a fun community of people giving away Steam games. Is it fair to ask the moderators to review media from the war and determine if the level of injury, gore, or death is too inappropriate? I poked my head in the Ukraine awareness topic the other day, and I got to watch an elderly couple get shot by a tank, a soldier get blown up by a grenade, and a pedestrian get crushed by a military vehicle. These are videos that stay with you a long time.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You also have to consider who is going to be reviewing all of the images and videos of people being brutally killed.

It's a strong argument, especially since the moderators are volunteers here.
There have been multiple documentaries about how social networks moderators are heavily affected by that, some even develop PTSD years after years of shitty work watching horrible things repetitively.
When there was tasks before on tremor, i remember some were about this sort of videos, torture, murder, the video of someone being vitriolized haunted me for years, and page after page it's beuarghh.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The second paragraph perfectly describes why, unfortunately, this is the best course of action. These topics are unmanageable and fall outside the scope of this website's moderating capacity.

I'm also curious to see how this will apply to other controversial topics raised by others. As you've mentioned, they will be handled on a case-by-case basis, so I'm not concerned that this marks the end of awareness threads.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Imho you should have put the moderation challenge at the top of the reasons behind your decision. I totally get why unpaid people would get frustrated by being forced to wade through the weirdest shit some trolls shared in recent years.
While every other user here has the luxury to ignore whatever they don't like (and that's why their desire to ban topics never made much sense to me), mods don't. And I respect that argument.

Your phrasing in point 2 is still ... though.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

They're causing pedestrians to become annoyed and many of the pedestrians don't like walking in the city any longer.

That is quite a dangerous mindset. In real life rules are quite clear. If there is speed limitation to 50 km/h you can get a ticket for driving 51 km/h, but nobody would fine you for driving 49 or 50 km/h because somebody was annoyed. There will always be some people who simply want to be annoyed by something and are easilly triggered by everything. Creating rules to make them happy would end up in banning everything.

About drasic wideos. NSFW materials are already against the rules. Just warn/suspend people who post them?

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You missed the point. canis39 wrote about allowing criminals to drive over people, that would end in government banning cars. cg wrote that the world is not clear-cut, and there would be a lot of drivers that pass people 2mm away at allowed speed. Without any people trying to actively kill pedestrians. Making them extremely anxious to walk outside. Same as drivers are required to pass cyclists "giving them at least as much space as they would give a car" (or similar, depending on the country). And drivers zoom past them, giving them literally not space left. How many near misses do you need before you drop cycling to work, and grab a car. To not feel each journey can end in an injury? In theory, drivers did not do anything illegal, but even if they would get ticket once because police was present - it would not bring up your mobility in broken leg, as you were hit.

Ukraine thread had people that either openly or low-key attacked, insulted other users or whole nationalities. I was going there again and again, and people were behaving for a couple of days or weeks. And then going back to how they used to be. No amount of "do not feed them, if they keep derailing discussion themselves they will end suspended for spam" helped. People did not see moderation for a bit, and were reverting to derogatory language and attacks. Recent case only focused the issue, and shown that people can't have discussion on some topics, without each message being moderated. Which is impossible. There are places like twitter where people can go and have wars there.

We have no-begging rule, and it doesn't matter if you actually beg or "joke-beg". The result is the same. I do not want to again thread through piles of hate messages, gore and misinformation, to decide which side is "more bad", or "who more started it". The only solution would be to suspend everyone, those who start and those who leave hate and flame off-topic by replying. But that would only polarize people even more, as in this kind of topics both sides always think they are in the right. At least terrorism part is clear-cut, and we can challenge people based on it. But there is no way to phrase "threads that bring negativity, polarize users and make them chose one side, which later results in opposing camps attacking each other" in a succulent way. Hence, you instead have a long rule and list of topics that are not allowed to be discussed.

I was against banning all political etc. threads. But we do disallow discussing two ongoing wars. Not saying rule wording can't be improved over time, but disallowing some listed topics will stay.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

That military conflicts discussions get closed is a good change. Nothing good can come from them.

That, at least, one of the creators of this threads, that posted NSFL gore links (the extremest stuff) don't got suspended is a bad joke. That the same user created a new discussion with the same content and redacted only the NSFL stuff and still had NSFW gore links in the thread and again not got a suspension is absolutely not tolerable.
The gore rule existed, the user known about the rule and don't cared, he decided that we (the community) must see killed, tortured people because he wanted that.
I am here to have fun and to relax, not to see such stuff and it is ugly that some users have a "protection" and can break rules multiple times without to get a suspension.

Ps.: I don't have a general problem with the user but he broke, willingly and knowingly, a rule 2x, so he should get 2 suspensions (NSFL links aren't value only for a "warning"), as it is written in the rules.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

And I agree that handling of this gore was not perfect. I opened the thread thinking I would see drone footage of a rocket hitting some target. Not burned children in their bed, or a guy being shot at from an automatic rifle at short range. I was not even able to check all the links in that discussion, just went to close it. If I could, I would delete it, but I can delete only replies. Not discussion main post.

Immediate thought was to suspend, obviously. But then I thought I would need to go to Palestine or Ukraine thread to check all recent posts, if there is any similar gore, and suspend people there. And I really did not have capacity or willpower to do it. If I'd leave only one side suspended, then we would have threads that support is biased.

Info we will work on updated guideline came few hours after I closed the thread. The next day we knew that threads will be closed. I really did not want to go through this gore, threads would be buried anyway. So I decided to not fill my head with even more images, that will come back randomly to me during the day. Just like this image of a person chained in some way to a tank barrier, burned to crisp, that sometimes pops up in my head. 1.5 year after I removed it from the Ukraine thread.

I am not a robot. I joined to help people re-rolling giveaways, or suspend people who try to beg in the forum. Not put images of burned bodies in my head. And I do not expect any other moderator to happily go, filter and suspend everyone who posted "bad enough" gore that is there. The user did get a note pointing to what was done, so if they decide to post such stuff in the future, it would not be a simple 2-day suspension.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm sorry but I don't follow your logic here..

You clearly saw a user overtly breaking the rules (posting gore content), twice even after being warned the first time, and your reason for not suspending them is because you think there are others out there, which you don't know about or seen, so you decide not to enforce the rules at all?

one would call that double standards

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

No, the reason was not to appear biased. In a polarized environment, anything which is done will be interpreted as taken Side A or Side B. Even if the reason is clearly described and according to rules, some users will complain and say that support has taken Side A because the Side B one got "censored".

So far so good. But then some user go through the other thread and find a post/posts violating the rules as well. Then, Side B will complain even more and call for bias because Side A broke the rules as well without being "censored". To avoid this, MSKOTOR would have to look through the whole other thread to make sure of this which is time-consuming and as she described mentally straining. That is why support decided that maybe "some" polarizing topics should be taken down completely. Because otherwise a support which wants to and has to stay neutral will get dragged into a flame war. And potentially ends up justifying himself multiple times which is again time-consuming and mentally straining. And neither Side A or B are actually listening because they already made up their mind.

Would this mean that a thread may be taken down which has behaved actually well within the existing rules? Yes, then again it didnt matter because people were just screaming at each others anyway.

Just my opinion.

Obviously, I think there may be better solutions. Also, some which do not take additional burden on the support. Though - despite the ambigous wording - I would wait for how these new rules play out before further pitch-forking.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

it's straightforward really, if you see a user breaking the rules (a big clear-cut one at that), on two consecutive occasions, you would discipline them accordingly.

apply the same rules equally to all users, in fact if you hold back in fear of how you might look to other side then you are in fact being biased and playing favorites.

no one is being censored here, we are talking about a clear violation of the rules (loads of gore and death images in one post)!

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You are either ignoring or underestimating human psychology. Sometimes doing the factual right thing makes a situation worse. This is by far not as easy as some people want to make it.

Optionally, you could have closed both sides threads AND suspend user A for violating site rules. It would look a bit less biased. But be aware that people who "feel" treated unfairly are rather stubborn. If you are reading game forums regularly, I would be surprised if you had not encountered at least one individuum coming back after its ban making threads like: "Why was I banned?" or "Moderators are censoring me/topic X"? multiple times until they are perma-banned. And even then some of them give not up.

Really, this is not easy to approach.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

all those threads from any "sides" got closed under the new rules (no divisive war talk), that's already done.

again I'm talking about enforcing those existing rules which were always clear to everyone (no gore stuff), which I have to repeat again that only one user openly created (two) threads with a barrage of horrendous gore images!

The suspension itself is a timeout for the user to reflect back and think twice before breaking rules, which in this exact case would have actually prevented that user from posting the same thing a second time without remorse.

There is no reason to over-complicate things here, it's not about bias at all.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

And again, MSKOTOR was not able to determine if only one user was violating the rules at the time. Because she would have to shift through the whole second thread. Which she did not do for stated reasons. Which could lead to perceived bias.

There is no reason to over-simplify things here. This is all about bias and polarization.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Because she would have to shift through the whole second thread

mods don't need to do that, if someone posted flagrantly violating gore content, it would have been flagged by users, and dealt with in support tickets.

we're not talking about some hypothetical buried comment in a very long thread that one has to hunt down, can you or anyone else point out any other featured thread with that many gore images in its main post?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It isn't needed to search for other rule breakers when you see someone break the (gore) rules to be "fair to all sides".
You see a rule break, you give them a warning (with a little thing but not with such a extreme amount of NSFL links!) or a suspension. Case closed.

If someone report a comment/thread because of gore, hate speech etc., you look into the ticket and if you can't handle gore vids you let do it a other mod (and look only a few seconds in and not the full vid).

Result was: No suspension for the first thread, lead to the creation of the second thread (again with gore links, this time """only""" NSFW), again breaking the rules and after the second time again no suspension.
How you want to tell someone that you suspend after this, that this user got no suspension but you will because XYZ (not important if for gore, a unactivated win, spam or whatever). It's double standards in the end IF this will be the end result, and i create a ticket with the clear demand that the WRONG decissions will be changed because it ignored existing rules 2x (and each one see it).

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Exactly

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Please, do not ignore the part about Mskotor not wanting to dredge through pages, hoping to find gore, like a robot, after still having flashbacks of other cases.

Mods are people and we don't really have too much of them.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I appreciate that, but the one we are talking about was immediately flagged by multiple people, and the mod already viewed a number of gruesome images in it, why would you not apply the rules to the offending user? it's not like it was a comment buried somewhere, we're talking about a top posted discussion thread which was then re-posted with clear intent after the first got closed.

if someone now creates a thread asking to trade games, it would be swiftly closed and user suspended, you don't refrain from applying the rules because you think there are other such comments you missed.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

No, I saw it once and closed it. And then it was decided other threads will be closed, so I did not go to check all messages in them. I already saw borderline messages in the Palestine thread, and left a warning in said thread. You can't say angry people did not post borderline or full gore there, and I'm just assuming stuff.

I will not explain again why I did not want to risk filling my head with even more gore images. If you think I should have no choice in deciding to not moderate the disgusting gore that was there - you can. Threads would be closed shortly, which would "moderate them out automatically". The chance of people randomly posting gore in threads outside war topics is minimal, if not non-existent. But then I would need to remove one random post. Not check nearly 700 posts where each link to yt or twitter or telegram can be gore.

You can't blame me for the fact no one from the moderation team wanted to go there, browse through those images, and issue suspensions.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

...that sometimes pops up in my head. 1.5 year after I removed it...

The following words are written without any kind of agenda:
I am sorry that you experience this today, will experience this in the future and had to experience this in the past. We see the same patterns with people on social networks who actually get paid (a laughable amount of money) to moderate content as an actual job. Many "professional" moderators get mentally ill just by doing their job, with PTSD and depression ranking the most high on a list of multiple illnesses.
The trauma you describe sounds like a manifested mental illness and I advise you to please seek out a professional psychologists to get help dealing with these images (it is not my place to diagnose you with PTSD).

I am very sorry that the state of the world (in multiple ways) caught up with the support team here at SG, where support had not had to deal with stuff like this for the most part of SG's existence.
We, as a community, failed you, and we all have to ask you and the other support members for forgiveness for putting you through these experiences.

But I can not leave without stressing that CG, as the site owner, also failed you. He failed to create automatic failsafes in time to reduce the stress for the support team. He failed you by still expecting volunteers to see and deal with those images and, at the very least, not compensating you moneywise for having to endure this. He failed you by not supporting free mental health care by professionals for the support team.

It was all fine when SG still was a little niche where us as a community by itself upheld a higher standard. When the site got huge CG still operated and to this day operates the site as if it still is an amateur website, a little hobby project on the side. All the while SG has grown into a business, a corporate machine that needs to be run as a professional business, but fails to do so.

I am sorry.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

you're too much of a PRO to tell ya how much we're all are different at reading, feeling, "connecting with" something. someone.

what i've just read hurts. and can't help myself thanking you, Mod.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Did you suspended that guy who was posting gore stuff? Did you suspended him when he was doing it again? You did that with ZALGO font and it worked. Though instead of warnings you were simply suspending people at sight. YOU gyus forgot to enforce already existing rules and then did shocked pikachu face when things escalated.

Sorry for not continuing with cars example but I'm too tired for this.

But yeah - I'm quite sure that removing whole topics will reduce amount of work you have.
Since that problem is solved... You plan to do the same move against autojoiners?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Read my reply above. Zalgo text does not make me have random flashbacks of burned corpses though the day, for me (and other mods) to not want to quickly moderate and remove it.

Zalgo text posted in discussions or giveaways was enough disturbing to people, to generate a wave of user reports. I am not having random pages that are unreadable, because some people thought it's "fun". It is a spam and inappropriate use of comment formatting. Suspending users ensured others do not spread it everywhere on the website, thinking it's allowed. There were people using so much zalgo that the giveaway descriptions were unreadable. Unless it's "zalgo day in this discussion" no website will allow you to post zalgo all over the place, ruining the experience for everyone else.

You brought up an unrelated point about cars not being able to drive at 40, when the limit is 50 "as it annoys someone", and I tried to point that it's not what cg wrote about. And instead of replying on topic, you decide to bring this zalgo text issue all over again, like a triumph card that everything support does is bad, as couple people were suspended 2 years ago for spamming it. And then we did not manage to solve another (extremely sensitive and mentally exhausting) matter in a time you deem appropriate.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Zalgo text does not make me have random flashbacks of burned corpses though the day, for me (and other mods) to not want to quickly moderate and remove it.

That's why I wonder why you dealt with zalgo quite effective, but you were so slow with gore. I'm under impression that gore is something that should be dealt with much faster :) While you are not really happy to watch that kind of stuff - you actually have seen what he posted. Why wasn't he suspended right away? Why just warning if there is a rule against NSFW and it's there for quite a long time.

you decide to bring this zalgo text issue all over again

Yes. Because I love this topic. It's a great example how effective you can be if you want. Great thing to compare when support doesn't suspend people posting actually disturbing stuff. Or does absolutelly nothing against autojoiners.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

"Why wasn't he suspended right away? Why just warning if there is a rule against NSFW and it's there for quite a long time."

That's what I'd like to know too.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm not really buying the excuse about not being able to discipline people because they're claiming they didn't do anything wrong. Who cares about their claims? If you have proof that they broke site rules, you should -- you MUST -- enforce the appropriate discipline.

Also, are there really "hundreds" of rule-breakers on the site? I think it's more like a dozen at most. And I suspect your mod team can pretty much tell you who the consistent rule-breakers are.

Moderating a polarizing topic is not trivial. I don't envy the moderators, and that is a strong argument to close an entire thread from time to time. But you didn't mention this in your announcement at all. And this still did not require any special rule. The content that you're referring to is against existing site rules.

Those videos you watched sound horrible. But again, those videos are against existing site rules. Did the person(s) who posted that content receive any discipline? I've heard that the Ukraine Awareness thread had multiple users engaging in behavior that is against existing site rules. Did those person(s) receive any discipline?

That's really my (and others') point. Ultimately, this site did not need special new rules (especially when the 2nd special new rule is written in a way to all but guarantee that it will be taken advantage of by trolls and troublemakers).

The site simply needs to enforce its existing rules consistently.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

amen to that.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Also, are there really "hundreds" of rule-breakers on the site? I think it's more like a dozen at most. And I suspect your mod team can pretty much tell you who the consistent rule-breakers are.

There have been 180,577 suspensions assigned to 56,546 unique users so far.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Wow. Did not expect a response at all, to be honest. But I certainly didn't expect this type of response.

You know exactly who/what we're talking about.

The people in the "war awareness" threads who posted content that was explicitly against current site rules. The people who posted the videos that you referenced. Did THEY receive any discipline?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Nice! I love stats. So maybe some more specific. For example the same stats for how many people were suspended for inappropriate behaviour. And with time period this time. Anyway 56k users suspended for last 10 years for this big community is not that much. Though it might be a little bit too much for mods because there is simply not enough of them?

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

If you activate the automatic autojoiner detection stuff, it will be 5k suspensions more in one go.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Now it's clearer to me what you mean by "ineffective or infeasible".

" If we identify a sensitive subject or event that is causing such a problem, we will first try to use our existing guidelines to keep the conversation civil. In exceptional cases where this proves to be ineffective or infeasible, we will consider adding the subject to the list above."
Mods shouldn't have to monitor extreme or hateful content on controversial threads day after day. But let's be honest, they haven't been. And they really don't have to be that deeply involved going forward either. Why not put the onus of some of this on the OP? The OPs really are a key part of this discussion that is being neglected. A war thread is a pretty heavy thing to start - for a serious person, it really is a lot of responsibility - and they should be expected to bear some of it or have their threads closed. Seems fair. I think that is why the Ukraine thread lasted as long as it did - the OP was courteous, fair and reasonable - his continuous presence set a positive tone and though there may have been some flare ups people were generally well behaved. It was only after he left that things began to deteriorate. By contrast, the OP of the Palestine thread was combative and irresponsible from the start, which resulted immediately in a very hostile environment - which is why it blew up in only a week. So why not require the OPs of controversial threads to monitor them themselves. They are reading them everyday anyway - and if they are not, they should close them. They can warn/report people who are misbehaving/rule breaking or trolling and if necessary suspensions are timely enough, that should nip a lot of problems in the bud long before they become a grueling slog for the mods. What have you got to lose? If OPs fail to maintain polite discourse in their controversial threads, you can close them. And with the added bonus that people will think long and hard before taking on such posts in the first place - so that much more likely you will have responsible OPs rather than loose cannons.
And we get to talk about things we want to talk about.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I completely agree,
This "nuke" approach that the site has employed won't work and will likely backfire the moment someone opens a "sensitive" thread.
Where this discussion will be just repeated.
It would have been far more sensible to do as you said, give responsibility to the OP to in a way moderate his/her thread and let the site moderators handle any cancerous posters swiftly with some suspensions or perma bans.
I am confident that if any moderator perma banned someone and posted a notice underneath that comment stating "This user has been perma banned due to ...." It would have made the rest think twice before entering a flamewar.
In the end, I believe that your solution would have resulted in a healthier community compared to what the site did now.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Reported 8/9 users but nothing happened. They trolled the topic for 6 days abuse me and my family openly called me terrorist/russian troll,threatened me(personal info,pics)/ insulted me and my religion openly... I was very polite i even thanked them when they abused me. Eventually overall enviroment became hostile. Just because they dont agree with something doesnt mean they have the right to abuse/insult/threaten someone.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Huh... so being a blowhorn for a terrorism organization (on a gaming website of all places) is a civil conference room discussion. Bruh that's a bad example you chose.

I didn't ask for the change but some things are just straight up vile and need to be pointed at and called out how it is. Unfortunately none of this, neither the blowhorning or the calling out make this place nicer or make this community which I love any better.

Hopefully better solutions will emerge from this discussion now but surely a change is/was needed.

1 year ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Sounds like you can pretty easily identify the "blowhorn" in question who was violating existing site rules. Which means the mods ought to be able to identify him also. And then take appropriate action against him. Which sounds like a better solution than creating new site rules and banning an entire thread.

We didn't need new rules, we just needed to enforce the ones we already have.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

why not instead implement community bans like Steam has? People can still use the site, create and join giveaways but can't post something on the forum (or a specific category of the forum like "Off Topic")

Or add a "report comment" / "report discussion" button so that your mods faster find possible problematic content? If it is reported by a lot of people it should be higher in the report list so your mods check the most reported ones first.

Same should be there for users/giveaways, combine reports of one and see when multiple user report the same thing (I don't know of course maybe this is already there)

Because we live in 2023, EVERY topic is sensitive to someone.

Edit: Report abuse should be a reason for a suspension then too of course

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Reasonable suggestions which won't be implemented in our lifetime :(

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+1

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You basically allowed the trolls to win and enabled their behavior, better solutions have been suggested instead of outright banning.

We want SG to continue being a welcoming place to both new and existing users and I think the new additions above are important in helping us maintain that atmosphere.

Yet this is a decision that affects the welcomeness of the users affected personally by the situation in that topic. You could have done better

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I personally welcome this new rule, if people want politics or some such they can go on reddit, this site is meant for casual/gaming stuff.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

i think this is funny that you react to this type of posts now and not 1.5 years ago when the ukraine awareness thread was created. that type of controversy was ok as long as it was about bashing russians. but now that the problem is about israel and palestina and people start bashing israelis, you take swift action and lock it.
this isnt a coincidence. the constant whining of the pro israelis seem to always work in their favor. be it on the internet or be it in media and politics.

EDIT: also now you can just censor any opinions you want with the pretext of it getting hostile and keep up the posts that are in your favor.
either lock all political crap or nothing. this is wrong.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I understand that this can be seen as inconsistent at first glance. But there are differences between both conflicts and between how these topics have been managed by the OPs and also by the moderators.
The Palastine thread was created like a week ago, Israel threads just a few days. So following your logic moderation stepped in only after the pro Israel topics.

If you look at https://www.steamgifts.com/stats/community/users, Russian users could have a way bigger impact regarding user reports. Now if you count users from US, Germany and other Western states as pro Isreal, you might claim the opposite, but be assured that not every Western person is pro Isreal and that there are still many people not falling for the polarisation game.

But I agree regarding your edit on the vague new guideline.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Nice question. Why now but no one will answer that properly.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 1 year ago.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Thank you very much

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Since there even no single, wholesome, and common definition of the "terrorism" term then it would be nice to have the one in the rules. And a list of the terrorist groups for the clarity.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

W Steamgifts

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Closed 1 year ago by cg.