Censorship in the Heroscapers community

[Grungebob]

Originally Posted by RetroJunky

I was wondering if anyone felt like the rep system helps promote censorship in this online community?

I feel that having an anonymous rep system doesn't hold people accountable for their actions when dealing reputation. I think that your member ID should automatically be posted when you leave reputation. This would help prevent people from neg repping over unfavorable opinions and start encouraging neg rep to be used for its proper intentions (misuse of the website).

With the recent announcements for Wave 10 and the DND master set, I have expressed my dislike in the products that will be released soon. In response to my opinions of these items, I have been receiving a lot of anonymous negative rep. I was even neg repped for my avatar and nothing more. It has gotten to the point where I feel unable to express my opinions, for fear of being neg repped if considered unpopular by somebody.

If I express my dislike for the new products, it is so my voice as a consumer can be heard. I want my input to be considered by WOTC when their reviewing customer reactions to their products. Hopefully this will help persuade a different direction for future product releases that I would be willing to purchase.

You titled this as a thread about censorship when in fact it is just another whine about neg rep thread. Yes you should be neg repped for your avatar. It is rude. Express yourself all you want, but being unnecessarily antagonistic in the midst of folks who are attempting pe positive is not helping anything. Now that I see your avatar, it makes me want to neg rep you. So don't be surprised if the neg rep continues to roll in. Nobody likes a negative nelly.

[clancampbell]

I get the jist of what Retrojunky is saying.

He doesn't like the new set. Thats fine thats his opinion and he has a right to it. If you like the new set, thats fine to, thats your opinion and you have a right to it.

This is a public website and message board. Its full of opinions. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, and I'm sure we all don't agree with each other all the time.

It has been my understanding that neg-rep was for someone being rude, obnoxious, spamming, and acting like a total (donkey).

Its ok to say you disagree with someone, but to neg them because you disagree with them, I think is in poor taste.

EDIT: Also to say that Retro is disrespecting Truth and Co. is a bit inaccurate. They didn't come up with DnD scape. WoTC told them thats what was happening and now they have to make the best of it.

[SuperflyTNT]

What don't you frakking people understand about the Rep system? Allow me to clarify once and for all:


THE REP SYSTEM IS A POPULARITY CONTEST, NO MORE, NO LESS.

Get over it. If you can't deal with the fact that someone neg-repped you, you have deeper problems, and likely are a sad soul craving validation of your thoughts from complete strangers...get a shrink!

[tubafication]

I'll get my opinion in here. I may have very little impact because I'm not a supporter but here goes.
I believe that disagreeing with someones opinion, that's fine, that's great. Getting mad at someone for having an opinion I think is wrong. Unless, the opinion is insulting someone.
In the case of the avatar, I think it could be taken many ways. In this, I think it should definitely be taken down with respect to the people who worked really hard to get the set out. Do I think it's fine to start a blog saying "Why I don't like the DnD set?", yes, as long as you justify your opinion saying it's nothing against the people who made this set, Ie. "I think that the two things should never be crossed so I do not like the new master set."
I think proper action should be taken against somebody who is be rude to other people, and the proper action is not neg-rep. I think if the person is told not to and they continually persist, then neg-rep is completely deserved.
(There are some exceptions to my argument, don't get me wrong, that's my opinion.)

[Cavalier]

Originally Posted by clancampbell

I get the jist of what Retrojunky is saying.

He doesn't like the new set. Thats fine thats his opinion and he has a right to it. If you like the new set, thats fine to, thats your opinion and you have a right to it.

This is a public website and message board. Its full of opinions. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, and I'm sure we all don't agree with each other all the time.

It has been my understanding that neg-rep was for someone being rude, obnoxious, spamming, and acting like a total (donkey).

Its ok to say you disagree with someone, but to neg them because you disagree with them, I think is in poor taste.

EDIT: Also to say that Retro is disrespecting Truth and Co. is a bit inaccurate. They didn't come up with DnD scape. WoTC told them thats what was happening and now they have to make the best of it.

Your understanding is incorrect. It has been stated repeatedly, by the Admin Staff, that it is not limited to the reasons you listed and is, in fact, a much more open system than that.

[CupidsArt]

I like it the way it stands, it's simple, and though a person doesn't have to be accountable for the the rep they give, at the same time, I would hope that those who give bad rep out of a childish notion are in fewer number than those who give rep for reason.

[1Mmirg]

RetroJunky, I posted this over in the rep thread. I think it may be relevant here too. The bottomline, for me, is rep is a means for people to express their responses to members of this community. There are no rules, only a response to how you or I come off to others.

This is not censorship (since nothing is actually be excluded, except for flagrant issues that you agreed to as a member here); it is a bit of social pressure, though.

For me, this is about a community. There will always be those that go against the group and stand out for it (the red rep marks that well), but most of the time we hope that we can have an actual community here. A place where people can politely share views and ideas.

I have seen no cases of negrep where someone was polite and sincere about what they posted, even if people disagreed. If you are not being polite, then, well, negrep may be warranted, just for that, nevermind your views. (BTW, I can imagine there are more than a few people who might find your current avatar less than polite.)

If you have strong feelings about the DnD Set then the best thing to do is to contact WotC. No one here makes the final business choices about Heroscape--they do. So complaining here excessively just doesn't make a lot of sense. Send Wizards a letter. But I hope you'll not try to create factions and tension and drama here in our community.

[RetroJunky]

Superfly I would agree with you that rep was a popularity contest, if the neg rep didn't have consequences. Too much neg rep can get you kicked off the site or deter people from trading with you. Being unable to express myself for an inconvenient thought to the self governed community for fear of neg rep suppression, therefore it is censorship. Wikipedia: Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the government or media organizations as determined by a censor. I know this censorship is not severe as somewhere like China, but it is still a form of censorship. If rep didn't have the potential to affect my account with the community then I wouldn't give a crap, but it does.

To Grunge and the others, how is this a whine and not a thread about censorship?

I state that I feel censorship occurs.
I offer a solution to help prevent censorship.
I give an example of how I feel censored.

To those that feel your member ID would lead to neg rep retaliation, I disagree.
If the neg rep was justified, then you would have no worries. If your neg rep was baseless, then you would need to be concerned and probably think twice before neg repping somebody.

[Cavalier]

Originally Posted by RetroJunky

Superfly I would agree with you that rep was a popularity contest, if the neg rep didn't have consequences. Too much neg rep can get you kicked off the site or deter people from trading with you. Being unable to express myself for an inconvenient thought to the self governed community for fear of neg rep suppression, therefore it is censorship. Wikipedia: Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the government or media organizations as determined by a censor. I know this censorship is not severe as somewhere like China, but it is still a form of censorship.

No, it won't! Aldin already clarified this. Rep will not get you banned. The kind of behavior that will lead to red boxes might, but the rep won't.

And let me add this: I have neg repped, anonymously, someone in one of the D&D threads. It was not for a contrary opinion, but rather for incessant, annoying restating of the same opinion in, in my opinion, a very combative way.

[CupidsArt]

Originally Posted by Cavalier

No, it won't! Aldin already clarified this. Rep will not get you banned. The kind of behavior that will lead to red boxes might, but the rep won't.

That statement almost makes me wish I had red boxes next to my name, though earning them is not something I wish to try.

[clancampbell]

Originally Posted by 1Mmirg

(BTW, I can imagine there are more than a few people who might find your current avatar less than polite.)

I for one don't consider Retro's avatar picture impolite. Its just a picture. Its not lewd or obsecene.

Granted my avatar picture of Obi-wan Kenobi is not seen in any sort of negative light.
I just wonder how folks feel if people choose controversial figures for their pictures. Say Obama, or even Michael Vick.

[jschild]

Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the government or media organizations as determined by a censor.

Is your speech Suppressed? Or is it still available to every single person who wants to read it?

Your speech is not suppressed as it is easily obtainable in exactly the same manner as any other post on this site, so you are wrong and it is not censorship.

You just want to be able to say anything without any chance of negative consequences, which has nothing to do with censorship, but with your hurt feelings and that is a massive difference.