Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

DDO's New Terms

TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)

-- TheHitchslap.
Thank you for voting!
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 3:42:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

Even if popular members are being banned and/or leaving?
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 3:46:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 3:42:21 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

Even if popular members are being banned and/or leaving?

Should being popular change anything? The destructive effects of treating people like crap are still bad, regardless of who does it. When the popular members are doing it, it has a much larger negative effect.

Being popular shouldn't give you immunity.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:01:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

Not what I said but alright then .. BTW this is bullying under the new TOS.

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

I disagree, and to be brutally honest with some of the stupid stuff said on DDO, some of the comments deserved to be mocked.

Holocaust denial anyone?
Elvis Presley still alive theories for instance?
Geo's epic quote about how Hitler never actually hated jews? Good times..

and no I'm actually not making this up..
Thank you for voting!
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:04:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

Besides, the people of DDO have other means to exercise to influence the behaviors of members that are "rogue" or "out of line"

Conduct points for example.
Or shaming
Or trolling
Or simply having them reported earlier, and having a moderator sort it out.

Simply kicking people out will be harmful to the site (lack members) and doesn't resolve the underlying conflict between two actors. Its just sticking a band-aid on a broken arm. Really, does nothing.
Thank you for voting!
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:06:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 3:46:50 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:42:21 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

Even if popular members are being banned and/or leaving?

Should being popular change anything? The destructive effects of treating people like crap are still bad, regardless of who does it. When the popular members are doing it, it has a much larger negative effect.

Being popular shouldn't give you immunity.

Are you saying that Imabench didn't earn his popularity? If great/popular members are leaving then the new terms are sh!t. People need to stop fvcking acting like the are trolls with alts VBing and spamming or the terms "Faggot", "Cunt", "Douche" are being dropped like it's Dresden. But that's life. Ah well. For the good of the rest of the forum, eh?
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:07:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 4:01:32 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

Not what I said but alright then .. BTW this is bullying under the new TOS.

No it's not. This is mocking a dumb idea, not a person.

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

I disagree, and to be brutally honest with some of the stupid stuff said on DDO, some of the comments deserved to be mocked.

No one deserves to be treated like crap.

Holocaust denial anyone?
Elvis Presley still alive theories for instance?
Geo's epic quote about how Hitler never actually hated jews? Good times..

I hate a lot of stupid people... But I should never treat them like crap over it. It's poor conduct. Being an a$$ is worse than being stupid. At least you aren't being stupid on purpose.

and no I'm actually not making this up..

You can mock the quote. the TOS says nothing about that. But calling Geo stupid isn't okay. We are all stupid at one thing or another, and we've all said unbelievable stupid things.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:11:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 4:06:01 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:46:50 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:42:21 AM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

Even if popular members are being banned and/or leaving?

Should being popular change anything? The destructive effects of treating people like crap are still bad, regardless of who does it. When the popular members are doing it, it has a much larger negative effect.

Being popular shouldn't give you immunity.

Are you saying that Imabench didn't earn his popularity? If great/popular members are leaving then the new terms are sh!t. People need to stop fvcking acting like the are trolls with alts VBing and spamming or the terms "Faggot", "Cunt", "Douche" are being dropped like it's Dresden. But that's life. Ah well. For the good of the rest of the forum, eh?

He did earn his popularity. I do not know how you concluded I said otherwise. Just because it makes popular people leave doesn't mean it's bad. That's assuming popular members are the final judge of what's right. Even some popular members should be banned when they do something bad. Some a while ago (and partially still) people wanted the popular Ore-Ele punished for breaking the rules.

This isn't life. This is a website... One that has rules, and calling someone a "f***ot" breaks those rules, as it should. And yes... For the good of the forum.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:15:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 4:07:17 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 4:01:32 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

Not what I said but alright then .. BTW this is bullying under the new TOS.

No it's not. This is mocking a dumb idea, not a person.

So then what's the difference between what your doing now, and what was done to Geo?

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

I disagree, and to be brutally honest with some of the stupid stuff said on DDO, some of the comments deserved to be mocked.

No one deserves to be treated like crap.

When you deny the holocaust, actually yeah you kinda do.

Holocaust denial anyone?
Elvis Presley still alive theories for instance?
Geo's epic quote about how Hitler never actually hated jews? Good times..

I hate a lot of stupid people... But I should never treat them like crap over it. It's poor conduct. Being an a$$ is worse than being stupid. At least you aren't being stupid on purpose.

When you deny the holocaust it seems as though you pretty much have to be stupid on purpose to believe something like that. It ought to be met with ridicule.

and no I'm actually not making this up..

You can mock the quote. the TOS says nothing about that. But calling Geo stupid isn't okay. We are all stupid at one thing or another, and we've all said unbelievable stupid things.

Under the TOS, this could easily be defined as "fighting words" because your mocking me is clearly trying to "belittle and demean" which states in the new TOS (and I quote)

"They're essentially a form of bullying. Even if you've avoided the specific use of an insult, if you post a diatribe intended solely to make someone feel bad, you're going against the goal of the site. If you're getting in the way of that goal, even if you're technically keeping your hands clean, expect to have a conversation on the subject with airmax."

So yeah, violating the TOS dude. your trying to provoke a fight.

I'm not saying don't disagree with me, but I'm trying to hammer home the point of how vague, and silly I think the TOS is, something as simple as this could be taken in the wrong way, and thus be a violation, even if the other person might not mean it in that way.
Thank you for voting!
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:19:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 4:04:12 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

Besides, the people of DDO have other means to exercise to influence the behaviors of members that are "rogue" or "out of line"

Conduct points for example.
Or shaming
Because shaming someone is now considered okay.

Or trolling
Trolling is funny. Calling someone a "fa**ot" isn't.

Or simply having them reported earlier, and having a moderator sort it out.

How can a moderator sort it out if you won't let there be a rule against it? The WHOLE point of the new policy is that Airmax is sorting them out.

Simply kicking people out will be harmful to the site (lack members) and doesn't resolve the underlying conflict between two actors. Its just sticking a band-aid on a broken arm. Really, does nothing.

Kicking people out isn't, itself, harmful. It's why you kick them out. Kicking someone out for being an abusive a$$ to others is exactly what cleans up a forum and makes it a better place for logical discussions. Kicking out problemed member does fix the issue by kicking the issue out. The argument isn't the problem, the person is. Examine.

Person A talks to Person B
A: I'm against abortion because a A, B, and C.
B: I'm against it because of D, E, and F. And A isn't correct

Person A talks to Person C
A: I'm against abortion because a A, B, and C.
C: You're a F***ing idiot. A is freaking stupid, and B is complete crap.

Same discussion, different person. The discussion isn't a problem. Whom you discuss with is.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:37:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 4:15:31 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 3/31/2014 4:07:17 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 4:01:32 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

How dare they not let me treat people like crap! This will ruin the site!

Not what I said but alright then .. BTW this is bullying under the new TOS.

No it's not. This is mocking a dumb idea, not a person.

So then what's the difference between what your doing now, and what was done to Geo?

Was Geo banned? And did this happen under these new rules?


No. Treating people like crap will ruin the site quicker than enforcing proper conduct will.

I disagree, and to be brutally honest with some of the stupid stuff said on DDO, some of the comments deserved to be mocked.

No one deserves to be treated like crap.

When you deny the holocaust, actually yeah you kinda do.

No. You deserve to be ignored... But not treated like crap with verbal assault. We aren't here to treat people like crap. That's what 4chan is for.

Holocaust denial anyone?
Elvis Presley still alive theories for instance?
Geo's epic quote about how Hitler never actually hated jews? Good times..

I hate a lot of stupid people... But I should never treat them like crap over it. It's poor conduct. Being an a$$ is worse than being stupid. At least you aren't being stupid on purpose.

When you deny the holocaust it seems as though you pretty much have to be stupid on purpose to believe something like that. It ought to be met with ridicule.

And yet they honest believe it. They're being stupid, but they truly believe they aren't. And no, it should be met with logic, not Ad Hominem. I'd rather be friends with an idiot than with an a$$.

and no I'm actually not making this up..

You can mock the quote. the TOS says nothing about that. But calling Geo stupid isn't okay. We are all stupid at one thing or another, and we've all said unbelievable stupid things.

Under the TOS, this could easily be defined as "fighting words" because your mocking me is clearly trying to "belittle and demean" which states in the new TOS (and I quote)

Again, you assume mocking an argument = mocking the person. It isn't.

"They're essentially a form of bullying. Even if you've avoided the specific use of an insult, if you post a diatribe intended solely to make someone feel bad, you're going against the goal of the site. If you're getting in the way of that goal, even if you're technically keeping your hands clean, expect to have a conversation on the subject with airmax."

You are misrepresenting the passage. It's referring to instigating a fight through what you say about the person, not what you say about they're argument. An example being attacking someone without ever referring specifically to him, like "Does someone need their diaper changed?" You never directly insult them, but you're trying to start crap. Insulting an argument is rudely instigating a debate, not a fight.

So yeah, violating the TOS dude. your trying to provoke a fight.

Hardly. I'm trying to provoke a conversation. Don't confuse starting a debate with starting a sh!t fight.

I'm not saying don't disagree with me, but I'm trying to hammer home the point of how vague, and silly I think the TOS is, something as simple as this could be taken in the wrong way, and thus be a violation, even if the other person might not mean it in that way.

The rules aren't that vague. They cover all ground regarding personal insult. It says nothing about insulting an argument, just a person.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:39:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Actually. Let's clear this up.

Airmax, what does the TOS say about insulting an argument? Not insulting the person, just the argument.

(While insulting the argument usually leads to a fight, that's because the person insulting the argument is usually quick to insult the person not much later. It's an issue of correlation, not causation.)
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 4:52:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 4:15:31 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 3/31/2014 4:07:17 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 4:01:32 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:17:55 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:

I'm not saying don't disagree with me, but I'm trying to hammer home the point of how vague, and silly I think the TOS is, something as simple as this could be taken in the wrong way, and thus be a violation, even if the other person might not mean it in that way.

Well. Looking over the TOS, it's very clear on what it considers Personal Insults. The only time it gets slightly vague is with instigating a fight. That's good, because it covers all grounds. Anything you do with the intentions to start crap is degenerative to the site as a whole. It should be punished. Insulting an argument is a broad concept, and can't be generalized. Let's look:

"That argument is crap." Insulting an argument. Not illegal.
"I expected a crap argument like that." Indirectly insulting you, is instigating a fight by making it personal. Illegal.

Basically, the difference between "instigating a fight" and "everything else" (like any other form of insulting an argument) is the difference between 'making it personal' and 'keeping it about the argument'. See? The policy covers all grounds, since instigating a fight can come in any form, and as such, it covers any form.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
lannan13
Posts: 23,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 7:16:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and 2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.

This is simply ONE example. I find that generally speaking the TOS makes a whole lot of generalities I do not agree with, with little to no explanation of what exactly he means by something or how the value will be discussed. (Example: fighting words, what I consider demeaning and bullying you might not, and vice-verse)

As such, I will finish up my debate with my opponent. It will be my last debate, and I too shall leave.

I'm standing with the Bench. I do not agree to the new terms of service, and I encourage other to do the same.

ImaREVOLUTION! ;)


-- TheHitchslap.

I agree this is retarded. I have long protested against many changes DDO has made.
Adds, changes from the Blue DDO version, and there long time loose rules.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
Haroush
Posts: 1,329
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2014 7:36:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/31/2014 3:09:30 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
I've seen the new post, noticed that Imabench is now gone, and pretty much have reflected for the last little bit about what I'm doing with my life.

DDO has taught me a lot, at the same time, I have other matters to attend to. The skills I've learned here will be applicable to me at a later date, and so I happily thank everyone for making me a better person on here. Being a poli-sci major and wanting to go into politics, this was exactly what I needed.

I have seen the new terms of service .. oh boy .. lots of issues.

For that matter, the TOS are draconian in nature in my honest opinion. Airmax does note, that the scope of the agreement has been altered to even include "threats of legal actions". Now, having studied this in University I must attest, that if someone were to slander me, and I sent them a message that I'm going to sue unless they take that down, by the TOS this is a threat and I am liable to being banned. This rule is ridiculous for two reasons: 1) this actually isn't a threat AT ALL. This is more like a warning of the consequences, whereas a threat is a statement of intention to inflict pain for retribution, a clear and obvious massive difference and

Well, I'd imagine if you talked to the moderator about the issue and it was legitimate, he'd give that person a warning and get rid of that person's post for you. Hence the reason, the moderator is the one to take care of public disputes and give warnings when needed.

2) This also does nothing to remedy the underlying issues that DDO might be facing at the time with members and conflicts. I believe that conflict can be a time for growth, if used in the right way, and DDO's new TOS does nothing, in fact it just furthers the conflict by pissing off more people. If I'm raging over something, and I got banned, I'm simply going to rage more.


I honestly do not understand this logic. I don't see how people can't see (even though there are new rules and regulations), it is still the same moderator who takes all things into account case by case and sees things all the way through. That's why when the new rules were first posted it said on the title (Personal Attacks). Meaning, the new rules don't limit your free speech, they just limit unnecessary comments.


-- TheHitchslap.