Slashdot Mirror


Cleaning up Thunder Bluff

An anonymous reader writes "Colleen Hannon at Gamers With Jobs is mad as hell, and she's not going to take it anymore. 'Unless you're playing Neopets, online servers are full of foul-mouthed, racist junk-monkeys. The hate-filled miasma they spatter around them has reached the point where many people who could be on those services won't go, and those who do brave it won't go without a posse and riot gear.' She plays out every side of the argument: why things have gotten as bad as they've become, what publishers have and haven't done about it, and why she thinks things are now at unacceptable levels of incivility. She's calling on us gamers to get together and figure this out, because: 'If we wait for the new sheriff in town to fight this battle for us we might not like the town we're left with.' Is it as bad as she says?"

524 comments

  1. Just leave general chat by WinterSolstice · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously - it's the only way to retain any hope for mankind :)

    --
    An operating system should be like a light switch... simple, effective, easy to use, and designed for everyone.
    1. Re:Just leave general chat by Tofystedeth · · Score: 2, Informative

      If only. I've seen so many atheism vs. Christianity debates over the trade channel. And that goes to all the cities. It's so irritating.

      --
      "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deeply or not at all."
    2. Re:Just leave general chat by fotbr · · Score: 1

      Leave both, sell things in the AH, and leave the 13 year olds to themselves.

    3. Re:Just leave general chat by OglinTatas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have left general chat. I also left trade channel and defense channel, because there are few on topic postings if any. Trade and defense are mixed in with the garbage on general chat. I've never been to LFG channel. Face to face talking and obviously /p or /g are about all that are not full of trash talking. (Or not.)

      That takes care of all the profanity, but now I get in-game spam-mail and spam-tells from 'xssdfjbv' or 'jwedexxsd' about gold prices. And if I /ignore, in 5 minutes I get "xlxsow removed from ignore list--no such player" then another spam-tell from 'wossdddd'

      Blizzard needs to do 2 things: 1) a "mark as spam" button which automatically logs a complaint and the evidence, and ignores the user for chat, tell, and mail; 2) as another poster put it, if I /ignore a player, I want the option to ignore the WHOLE account, no matter how many alts the guy uses--chat, tell, mail, duel spam, plain talking, yells, and emotes.

    4. Re:Just leave general chat by Tofystedeth · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but somethings are hard to sell/buy over the AH, like lockpicking services. It'd be nice if the GMs would just chan-ban anyone participating in a wildly off-topic discussion more than say, 3 entrys.

      --
      "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deeply or not at all."
    5. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Title musta been screwed up. May have confused Thunder Bluff with the Barrens. They even got a t-shirt.

    6. Re:Just leave general chat by Locriology · · Score: 1

      This is true. If you can't take it, the "Exit" button is right there. That's something that's not there in real life. So there's one reason we should put up with it on the internet even though it's not acceptable in real life. The first time you log into an MMO on a PvP server, you get ganked, and you think to yourself "Wow, that was rude and unnecessary!" So you spend 20 minutes arguing with the guy who ganked you and it turns into a "Who's a bigger fag" argument. The more times you get ganked, the less you take it personally. The more times you get insulted on an MMO, the less you take it personally. You toughen up over time, and once you get used to it, that's when you can truly enjoy the PvP servers. Then, once you log off, and someone insults you in real life, you don't take it personally. You know that only noobs whine and insult other people. No one ever died from flame wars in MMO's. The worst that could happen is you get sad for a few minutes, then you learn your lesson. You come out with tougher skin than you had before, in the game and in real life. I don't think we need to change a damn thing about this. And if, by some change, you get so upset by the comments of people online...once again, the "Exit" button is right there.

    7. Re:Just leave general chat by Judg3 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually in 2.1 that's being implemented. If you get a tell, you can right click and 'Report Spam' it - this automagically also ignores that user, not just that particular player, but the entire account.

      --
      Looking for hardware (Currently need: Large Etch-a-Sketch) Have one? See my journal!
    8. Re:Just leave general chat by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      Blizzard needs to do 2 things: 1) a "mark as spam" button which automatically logs a complaint and the evidence, and ignores the user for chat, tell, and mail; 2) as another poster put it, if I /ignore a player, I want the option to ignore the WHOLE account, no matter how many alts the guy uses--chat, tell, mail, duel spam, plain talking, yells, and emotes.


      As for (nearly) automatic logging of complaints: SpamSentry addon. Turn spammers in to a minigame (kind of). That'll hold you over until the new patch hits that does exactly what you're asking for.

      As for ignoring the account... I doubt that's going to do any good. More than likely the spammers are using cheap, throw-away trial accounts. Spammers are simply going to start churning through them a little faster. You'll still see spam.
    9. Re:Just leave general chat by Omestes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So your argument is "Your a better man for being called a fag by hormonal 13 years who pee into their Mountain Dew bottles"? I disagree. I think that Blizzard, and other MMO makers, lose some degree of profit from harboring hostile player atmospheres. I know I finally quit playing, in part, because I started getting sick the growing amount of idiots out there, and my server wasn't too bad, even (Cenarian Circle [RP]), but the various PvP and RP/PvP servers I played on were just a place for anonymous idiots to inflict themselves on others for fun. Several of my friends refuse to play WoW because of the shear amount of uncouth children running about. Being called a "fag" 60 times an hour is not fun, I don't really care if it makes me a "tougher" person, I'm too old to really care about that anymore. I want to have fun, not build character.

      Not saying that there isn't good people on WoW, over the year or so that I played I managed to get a nice friends list, and join a guild filled with very adult people. I did manage to have some very nice conversations while sitting around in Stranglethorn being bored at 3am. But the more populous places were almost unplayable, like the Crossroads.

      I'd say this would fall into the "tragedy of the commons" ideology. Just because you can be a moron, doesn't mean you HAVE TO be a moron. Arguments of character building aside, why should I accept being called a "fag", ever? How is this acceptable in a polite society?

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    10. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. People are smart. If their goal-of-the-moment is to create shock, anger, hurt...then they know racial epithets are still very very effective. This is only true because other people are sheep. Your reaction is what lends weight to the insult.

      2. I don't think young people know what racism or racists are anymore. This is a long discussion, but remember this post...racism/racist -those two words are become so highly over-used and stretched to cover all manner of human behavior they are become distilled. 99% of the globe would be considered racists, or have racist tendencies.

      Personally, I've relegated what comes out of people's mouths to a much smaller makeup of my estimation of them. People lie. And if you have some potential impact on my life, I will certainly be weighing your actions, past & present, far more then your words.

    11. Re:Just leave general chat by shokk · · Score: 0, Troll

      Shut up you *&!@^$*&^@ N00bZ!!!
      j/k

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    12. Re:Just leave general chat by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only thing I recieve at this point in WoW is guild chat, pm's and party messages. Everything else is ignored. Our guild is big enough (Dark Hand of Chaos on Gilneas) that anything you'd want to sell has a taker in the guild. Same with speciality services such as lock picking... there's always somebody in the guild that can do some obscure thing.

      Yes, I know my aruguments are guild centric...

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    13. Re:Just leave general chat by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      2) as another poster put it, if I /ignore a player, I want the option to ignore the WHOLE account, no matter how many alts the guy uses--chat, tell, mail, duel spam, plain talking, yells, and emotes. I would love to see a feature like that. I'd also like it to make that account's avatars invisible to me in the game world. I really can't stand the idiots who constantly jump. Those morons pretty much kill the last bit of immersion I get in the game.

    14. Re:Just leave general chat by Locriology · · Score: 1

      You're right that there are way too many idiot kids who play these games. And I agree it can be annoying. I just think that Colleen Hannon is another whiner who thinks censorship will solve problems. No one ever said you had to accept being called a fag. But when someone does call you a fag, do you call the police and say you're being harrassed, or do you just pass off that guy as a loser? You learn to solve the problems yourself and deal with it. What we don't need is more whiny people trying to get the powers that be (in this case, SOE, Blizzard, Yahoo chat mods) to "crack down" or "do something about it".

    15. Re:Just leave general chat by nahdude812 · · Score: 1

      I use SpamMeNot, and since I installed it I haven't seen a single spam since.

      The problem with a mark-as-spam & report is that the spammers are using throw-away free accounts and using them nonstop until that one gets banned, then they create another free account and proceed as before, doing this on the broadest possible networks they can (such as AOL) so that IP-based banning would hit too many innocents.

      The real solution though is to make it so that the free accounts can only send a message to a total of 5 unique characters in any 1-hour period (on an account level), and can't talk on public channels at all. Also they should not be able to send any in-game mail until level 5. It would raise the difficulty of spamming large numbers of people high enough that it couldn't possibly be worth it.

    16. Re:Just leave general chat by hobo+sapiens · · Score: 1

      That's what she is saying. The summary says she is calling on gamers to stop this so someone else doesn't have to. That means she doesn't want games to be censored.

      --
      blah blah blah
    17. Re:Just leave general chat by Kozz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Phew. Hopefully that "ignore" action is based on consensus (multiple reports). Otherwise it could be easily abused, couldn't it? Imagine a scenario where two players meet: Player A decides he doesn't like Player B for whatever reason. Later, Player B sends Player A a "tell" (maybe annoying but not spammy), so Player A decides to smack him down with a spam report. Insta-boot!

      Of course I'm speaking from a position of ignorance, never having played the game (*gasp* blasphemy?).

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    18. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here, though I just have all of the channels I actually pay attention to color coded and leave everything else in grey, so I don't have to go alter settings if I need to use, say, trade, but it isn't distracting. I was in OutBreak on Gilneas until we packed up shop, your mentioning DHoC caught my eye.

      General Chat really is a cesspool of idiocy, but when we had the global Looking for Group channel it was worse.

    19. Re:Just leave general chat by C0rinthian · · Score: 1, Interesting

      They're placing restrictions on trial accounts in the patch. They can't trade via mail, trade window, or auction house. They can't whisper anyone who doesn't have them on friends lists. They're limited to level 20. (I think) They are also putting a limit on how many messages a person can send in a set amount of time.

      So basically, spammers are getting killed next patch.

    20. Re:Just leave general chat by C0rinthian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here is a better analogy: If you own a store, and someone is inside verbally abusing your customers, do you:
      A) Tell the abuser to leave.
      B) Tell your customers to deal with the abuser.

      Which do you think is better for your business?

    21. Re:Just leave general chat by Hubbell · · Score: 1

      So you can't handle someone using words on the internet? If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Shit talk is a part of competitive gaming, and there's nothing wrong with it.

    22. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      This is just total crap I have been playing MMORPG Games for 12 years now. Old Games Like Meridian 59 never had things like this. You also do not see it in other games. Why quite simply because there was no race wars or "good vs evil" or anything like that. If someone was acting out of line and you didn't like it you killed them plain and simple. And unlike WOW death penalties hurt. M59 everything you wre carring drop at the feet of your killer for them to pick through. You lost the equivalent of a level. You seariously could kill someone enough times to put them back to a newbie, which did happen. Basically this was much more like old times where if you acted up someone would come along and kill you. The server handled itself, this left the devs and mod free to create new content and so on not police people. Also back then if you were not tough enough you hired my Guild. Thats what we always claimed to be, The Assassins Guild, basically the trashmen of the server we kept the servers clean.

      Basically what your seeing in online games is what you will be seeing in real life eventually. Games took out PVP and made safe areas because people whined that it was unfair that they got killed several times that by running thier mouth there was consequences. School playgrounds used to be the same way. Kids that ran thier mouths got beat up every bully eventually got what was coming to them. Now we have playground where every kids is playing games where everybody wins, everyone is equal, if someone acts up on the playground well then they get a talking to. This is what happens folks.

      While yes I killed people in the games for money there was a penalty as well. Since I was labled in the game rules as a murder if I died I lost twice what someone else would I gained experience slower it was my price I was willing to pay. So if someone runs thier mouth in games they should be willing to pay the price of being rerolled by the mobs.

    23. Re:Just leave general chat by dOxxx · · Score: 1

      SpamSentry is a great tool for detecting and blocking spam whispers/tells/etc and making it easy to report them via a GM ticket with one click. I am assuming that it will be updated for the 2.1 spam reporting feature as well.

      http://www.wowace.com/wiki/SpamSentry

    24. Re:Just leave general chat by schwartzg · · Score: 1

      Arguments of character building aside, why should I accept being called a "fag", ever? How is this acceptable in a polite society? I think that the problem is that people do not view MMOs as a part of polite society but as a place where anything goes. Because it is for the most part anonymous people feel that they can push the bounds of what is acceptable, it will probably be a long time until society establishes and accepts a set of shared beliefs and views on what the "correct" attitude in MMOs is. I suspect that such a fundamental code of conduct, that is a unwritten understood code, will not happen for a little while because the current generation of teenagers and impolite gamers will need to grow up first.
    25. Re:Just leave general chat by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      I imagine the current reporting system does this: I file a report that someone is spamming me. In doing so, I implicitly give permission to the GMs to take a look at all tells sent to me by that person. They take a look at the communication between us and decide whether or not the person was really spamming.

      All this does is automate the reporting step and automatically ignore them as well.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    26. Re:Just leave general chat by kwerle · · Score: 1

      I play on an RP server, because talking crap is a bannable offense there.

      I installed SpamSentry yesterday because of the spam:
      http://ui.worldofwar.net/ui.php?id=3451

      Works like a charm.

    27. Re:Just leave general chat by deanoaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >>> How is this acceptable in a polite society?

      The Internet is not a polite society. As the GP said, you just have to accept the fact that anything can be said there at any time and adjust to it.

      In a way, the idiots are doing you a favor. How hard is it to find out that a random stranger is a sick loser who should not be trusted or associated with--if they are being restrained in what they can say and do? It can be hard enough to end up costing you.

      Every time somebody lets you know they are a waste of space at no appreciable cost to you, you have profited by how easy you got that information, and you can act accordingly.

      --
      If 'the people' in Amendment 2 are 'the state' then Amendments 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10 benefit the state, not you.
    28. Re:Just leave general chat by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "it's the only way"

      No, the only way is to dust off and nuke the site from orbit.

    29. Re:Just leave general chat by Locriology · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're right from the business perspective. From the consumer's perspective, if there's always someone in that store annoying you, you would probably just stop going to that store.

    30. Re:Just leave general chat by pfhlick · · Score: 1

      the thing is that all the foul mouthed spammers are paying too. if your customers simply tolerate harassment and keep spending their money alongside the jerks, then there's nothing to be done. in fact, i'd bet that most mmorpgs are benefiting from having tons of assholes running around, wasting their money, trying to annoy folks who have already learned about the ignore button, and simply don't care.

      outright harassment is a different matter, but every game has admins or immortals to whom you should appeal in such cases. in my experience, justice is usually pretty swift and unforgiving, if the deed is really that bad.

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the fish
    31. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe allow complex regexps on incoming statements
      so you can replace fag with "gangsta" or "balla" or some other word you think is "cool"
      eventually you can just replace what folks are saying to the point where it doesn't offend you... then you can kick back and relax as people call you the coolest dude around :-)
      and suddenly people will stop flaming each other because they know you are reading it as the most profound compliment ever :-)

    32. Re:Just leave general chat by originalnih · · Score: 2, Informative

      Trial accounts have NEVER been able to trade, and have always been capped at 20.

    33. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, you may think all these little Terms of Service rules are your best friend the second some kid dumps his load of foul language into the chat but, the uber trolls are no match for you. They'll find some XSS bugs in your guild website and shut it down, drop your real life address on wowwiki, and order pizzas to your house. You think you're the anonymous swearing police reporting every little violation but they know where you live. Underage? They'll scare your parents so bad they won't let you play the game ever again. A mother? You'll be so worried over the safety of your children you'll move to another city and change your phone numbers.

      If you just play the game and avoid the trolls you'll be fine but, if you fight back, they'll ruin you. Don't like griefers and trolls? Try playing on servers that have a more family oriented community like a roleplay server.

    34. Re:Just leave general chat by Nullav · · Score: 1

      And if I can report them as I ignore them, everyone else gets one less message. The reverse will be true as well.

      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    35. Re:Just leave general chat by analog_line · · Score: 1

      I want that to work on all ignores, not just Report Spam-based ignores. If it's just on report spam, there's going to be way more reports than actual spam just to get the account-ignore feature.

    36. Re:Just leave general chat by MadLep · · Score: 1

      Why can't Blizzard just implement some bayesian style filtering for the in game whispers. Email spam filtering works pretty well. It's really the same thing.

      (Even just limit the number of whispers lvl 1 characters created in the last 5 minutes can send...)

    37. Re:Just leave general chat by genus+babbage · · Score: 1

      given the free accounts easily available, and the ease of creating a new character with a random name and then automatically sending a message to pretty much everyone logged on, the only way that worked for me was white-listing. Something like WRUGS (which is what I used before I stopped playing WoW) - basically if the person messaging you isn't on the white list (or in group/guild/raid) then the text of the message is ignored, and the sender is sent a message explaining about the white list and how to get on it; no gold spammer is ever on long enough to read the auto-replies anyway, and anyone else can choose to bypass it or not as they prefer. The system also has the advantage that it pretty much stops all messages from the beggers too.

    38. Re:Just leave general chat by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

      Excellent post, sir. Alas my mod points won't count for you. Ignoring the whole account is a brilliant idea.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    39. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still not a good analogy. A better analogy is: You own a store and two of your paying customers are in it. One of your customers is abusing one of your other customers. What do you do?

    40. Re:Just leave general chat by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      3) block characters less than level 10 from whispering to other players not in their guild/party. I would have said map zone but then the level 1 char just gets walked up to SW/IF and spams there. I pointlessly suggested this in game one time and got what I presume was a higher level gold farming character tell me that it would be too hard to implement and couldn't be done. Except that's exactly what is done with trial accounts.

      Hopefully this 'Report as Spam' button is something that will be monitored both ways as well. If someone makes a lame joke in IF chat and morons don't like it and mark it as spam, then a warning or something would be great. Maybe have a 2 minute timer icon in the top right hand corner that is like an 'Are you sure' button that allows you to re-think your decision. Either that or I hope they bought new servers to handle the spam reporting load.

    41. Re:Just leave general chat by SnowNinja · · Score: 1

      Why wait for 2.1? Pick up the Spam Sentry addon to block chat gold for cash advertisements. It also has an ingame mail button to report as spam. The chat filter has a 2 click GM report option, the mail feature may aswell.

    42. Re:Just leave general chat by ghouck · · Score: 1

      It's the same with almost all online games, not just MMOs. I've never played WoW because of that exact reason: Too many people just plainly and simply being abusive. I'd like to say too many KIDS, , but unfortunately the only 2 people I know that are guilty of this type of behavior are both adults, and not 18 year old adults, , mor like 38 year old adults. That's exactly why I make mods for Unreal Tournament, ,and NOT Counter-Strike/Half-Life 2, , , Most Counter-Strike/Half-Life 2 players are not worthy of my time and efforts. . . .

    43. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most MMOGs have RP (role playing) servers where rules are more strict about staying in character for the genre in question, and where moderaters can ban players who don't follow the rules.

      If you want a more pleasant experience, join an RP server.

    44. Re:Just leave general chat by devnull17 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've played on both RP and normal PvE servers. There's no difference whatsoever, except that people whine about each others' innocuous names and force them to change them. No one actually role-plays. The general levels of player skill, intelligence, English fluency, helpfulness and friendliness aren't any higher than they are on other servers. If anything, the players are slightly more noobish (and insist that they not be held accountable for sucking, as they play for fun) in PvE, and downright awful in PvP.

      But I hear you can get some hot night elf ass on the Deeprun Tram.

    45. Re:Just leave general chat by devnull17 · · Score: 1

      Having learned this myself through trial and error, the trick to avoiding asshats lies in the game's social structure. Yes, there are a lot of 13-year olds who play, and most of them are annoying and stupid. But if you find a good guild to join, you can pretty much ignore everyone in general and just group and trade in-guild.

      If anyone calls you a fag, feel free to report them; they will get their account suspended. Which has to be worth something, right?

    46. Re:Just leave general chat by xmod2 · · Score: 1

      I think it depends on how many of the customers are verbally abusing one another.

      You own a biker bar and the majority of your patrons curse and verbally abuse one another. A family comes in for lunch after church and complains about your surly patrons, do you:

      A) Tell them they're going to have to deal or leave.
      B) Tell your customers to be nice to the poor family.

      Which do you think is better for your business?

    47. Re:Just leave general chat by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      There is an addon as part of the ACE suite of addons called "SpamSentry". In two weeks it intercepted and filtered over 200 unsolicited whispers. There's no looking back once you're protected!

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    48. Re:Just leave general chat by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      I think the general mentality of the players is atrocious. There's a few sensible people and so very many immature white rapper wannabes, racists, etc.

      But thinking economically, people who behave that way form the majority of Blizzard's revenue stream.

      Blizzard is a mindless corporation. Do you think they would happily kick/ban/remove 90% of their revenue stream to keep an intelligent, well mannered 10% still paying?

      Unfortunately the invisible hand favors morons in WoW.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    49. Re:Just leave general chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, you mean there are still people who use General and Trade chat? I just hang out with my groups of buddies and guildies. Forget the rest.

  2. There's this thing... by djones101 · · Score: 1

    We call it the ignore button. It...ignores people. And amazingly enough...it works!

    1. Re:There's this thing... by faloi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All too often, it's not quite enough. Ignore would be great if, to use WoW as an example, you could ignore an unlimited number of people AND have it ignore the account as a whole, not just the toon causing the problem. I care less about profanity than I do people spamming channels, but when I /ignore someone...I want them completely ignored.

      --
      "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
    2. Re:There's this thing... by DonnieD701 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are right.. You have freedom of speech to say anything you want... That doesn't mean you have the right to be heard.... That's the whole issue, isn't it? Just cause you gotta say it doesn't mean I gotta listen....

      --
      A witty saying proves nothing. Voltaire (1694-1778)
    3. Re:There's this thing... by Cathoderoytube · · Score: 1

      No kidding. People somehow think GMs in games are some kind of magic genie that'll solve all their problems. The trouble is these lunatics who're willing to wait in line for 6 hours just to complain to a GM about how somebody called them a bad name are the sort of people who hope beyond all hopes that the name caller will get their account banned. They get a sort of pathetic satisfaction in trying to get peoples accounts banned.

      --
      I have nothing compelling to say
    4. Re:There's this thing... by iapetus · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you ought to learn what it is (and how to spell it) before you start to scream about your right to it. Most of the people who shout about it the loudest have least clue as to exactly what their rights to free speech actually are.

      --
      ++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
      Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
    5. Re:There's this thing... by hal9000(jr) · · Score: 1

      I rememeber on LambdaMOO, when you ignored someone, they disappeared from your view. That was great.

      In SecondLife, you can mute someone and they can't contact you, but if they are a greifer, they can still bump and visually harrass. I would love to have Mute remove the offender (and alts) from my total experience.

      That is a much more civil response then engaging in a fight.

      What I don't understand, though, is when I run into someone who refused to Mute people like they find it offensive or something. I don't get it.

    6. Re:There's this thing... by Raydot · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this post misses the point entirely. Of course you have freedom of speech, but there's this little thing called civility. You don't run around saying things like this to people in the street, do you? So why does the fact that we can't see (or hurt) you make this ok? Even you must realize this, or you'd probably not have sought to obfuscate your language.

      But then, that's probably one more good argument wasted on someone who's so clearly part of the problem.

    7. Re:There's this thing... by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      I remember the one time I reported someone in Halo2. Every time this kid opened his mouth, it was related to 'your mom'. Man, that got old fast. I didn't report him because he offended me. If you're going to be vulgar, at least put some effort into it. Get some new material.

      I consider it the e-Gong.

    8. Re:There's this thing... by Speare · · Score: 1

      I like the sentiment, but there are some serious gameplay issues to work out when you say "ignore everything about that person/account."

      You just put an object on the ground. Can a person you're ignoring pick it up? Can you see or pick up items they drop? Can you walk through land registered to them? On fighting MOGs, can they surprise-attack your friend (who doesn't ignore them but didn't notice them) right in front of you, and won't that be a bit hard to understand until too late? Can you just ignore a guard who is blocking a path and walk through them? Can you just ignore one or more of the world creators and walk through the walls and locks and monsters and other barriers they put there to control the game experience? What does it take to make someone un-ignorable, and how will you guarantee someone so entrusted doesn't abuse that power?

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    9. Re:There's this thing... by TNTSoggy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually no freedom of speech does not apply to game servers because they are the equivalent of private property, I'm a member of the gaming clan and we have a ZERO tolerance policy on racial terms and most profanity. if you use it your warned, the next time your kicked, and if you comeback and do it again your banned. we ban a lot of people but we gain even more because we run a clean server.

    10. Re:There's this thing... by Omestes · · Score: 1

      With freedom comes responsibility. Just because you are "free" to do something, does not mean you should.

      For some reason this has been completely forgotten in modern society.

      Actually I don't think that calling people "fag" in a videogame goes under freedom of speech, legally. If Blizz decided to ban all the griefers, no ones civil liberties would be harmed.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    11. Re:There's this thing... by MeanderingMind · · Score: 1

      Why wait? I can submit the report and then forget about it. If I play for 6 hours, I'm there to give the GM more details. If I switch to an alt on the same server, the GM still finds me. If I log off, I get an e-mail explaining what the GM will do. No "waiting" is really involved unless you're going to sit there and do nothing until a GM talks to you.

      Do I report "name callers"? No. I report bots, gold spammers, and people with offensive names. Reporting name callers would make my life tougher, as their choices in vocabulary simplify guild recruitment and grouping in general. Someone who strings together explicitives and slurs gives me the early warning signal to "get the hell out of Dodge".

      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    12. Re:There's this thing... by Cathoderoytube · · Score: 2, Informative

      Things like Xbox live and Warcraft at least have ignore functions. It's not difficult to block out the assholes on those systems. Have you ever played Ultima Online? Now THERE'S a game for assholes. There was no limit. If you felt like it you could go through the wilderness naming all the animals 'so and so is a faggot'. Or if you went to Buccanears Den you were 100% likely to be killed by some roaming asshole. They used to crowd around the portal casting firewall spells so people would be killed as soon as they came through. Or if you were just standing around minding your own business somebody'd pick your pockets, then when you tried to complain some other asshole would come along and throw a fireball at you. I think that was probably the most organised group of assholes there ever was.

      These days though nobody plays that game any more so Buccanears Den is quite safe. I imagine it'll take some time for Warcraft to make that sort of change.

      --
      I have nothing compelling to say
    13. Re:There's this thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WoW is adding 2 click spam reporting in the next patch along with a limit on sending tells, this info has been posted for a week now . Since TFA will not load I'd venture to say that this is just ignorant crying with the up and coming patch plus the dozen mods that filter for spam and obscenities.

    14. Re:There's this thing... by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      I once got reported for something along the lines of telling someone to fuck off of they didnt like my healing. They were being a total jackass though they never actually swore so when they reported me, the logs were clean for them. I get an email later saying if I do that too much more I will get suspended/banned. I think this is a definite abuse considering the presence of an ingame profanity filter (I wasnt saying "fu ck" or something to get around the filter...he had it off) that is enabled by default. It's a mature rated game and I wasn't being particularly offensive, I was just giving the jackass what he had coming. After he pulled a guaranteed wipes worth of mobs and hearthed himself out I simply added him to my friends list with the note "Do not Party With"

      Best part was that his char name was clearly a play on the word penis. a few weeks later I saw someone swear mildly in city general chat and I see this guy say "reported" and I thought what a dick...he should mind his own business and turn on his profanity filter instead of reporting random people in city chat. So...I decided to report him for his name and some of my guildies did the same. The next day I see some random name on my friends list and penis-dude is gone

      --
      Bottles.
    15. Re:There's this thing... by Bahamut_Omega · · Score: 1

      I happen to play MapleStory which also has a nice little blacklist feature. Though it does have it's share of foul mouthed twits that are either hackers, crackers or immature little kids with a little too much access to their parents' credit/debit card. There it's either Super Megaphones which broadcast the message to the entire server, or they start spamming with whispers. Thankfully you can disable the whispers indefinatly; but it gets a little nasty when a hacker trys to kill you for being on his map. I've seen where someone had vacuum hacked a low level monster to try to kill me in a pathetic attempt. Thankfully that the Global MapleStory client does allow reports of hackers to be sent along with a chat log now. Meaning any disruptions could wind up getting a little ban hammer when they eventually find that it's from either hacking or someone being a little motormouth. And from a pair of MapleStory forums that I lurk around; it's usually a good thing when you see a GM decide to post a message in blue text about who got banned or if they happen to joking around.

  3. There is no solution but moderation by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    If you want to control this problem, you will need moderation. That is simply the only way to achieve it. You can be just as offensive typing fvck as you can typing fuck, and it won't get caught by the majority of filters. And in terms of speech, well, why would you ever want to hear anyone who isn't on your team? And why would you want to play with a bunch of foulmouths unless you were one?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:There is no solution but moderation by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      I agree. On our personal UT server, we have a fairly extensive ban-list. While a few are people who refuse to play nice with their team, the vast majority of our bans are "Fuck U HOMO!" bans. Since we started getting aggressive with our bans, we haven't noticed any real drop in the number of users - less seem to be leaving due to getting fed up with the offensive kids. Once the "regulars" of the offensive crowd got banned, more people stay for a longer time.

      Moderation is the only real answer - anything else can be abused and manipulated. As sad as it is, you need cops to weed out the bad eggs, so that everyone else can do what they want to do.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
  4. Now that's a timely article by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was just threatening to yank the impromptu slashdot chat room after a (literally) 12 year old chatter was getting out of hand. You know, I remember being a young teenager with loads of "hacking" scripts. I *don't* remember being so annoying about them.

    On the other hand, it's always funny when they fall for the "Alt-F4 to kickban" trick. :P

    1. Re:Now that's a timely article by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I like telling someone to go \/quit when they are being one of those copy cat aholes.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  5. Just give us the option by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the hate-filled miasma they spatter around them has reached the point where many people who could be on those services won't go
    That's me. I prefer not to surround myself with all that negative energy, I generate enough myself. If an online game company wants my business, they should run a "play nice" server where players who act like that can be bumped to a regular server. I enjoy competition -- but I can't stand the racist, misogynist etc chat to be found in most games.
    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    1. Re:Just give us the option by Saxmachine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Me too. I worry about what the future of video gaming holds for me when I read review after review forgiving a game's insubstantial single-player mode because "online play is what it's all about." What about those of us who play video games (as opposed to sports, board games, etc.) as a way to have a bit of fun without human interaction? It looks like the best I can hope for is that I'll become too busy to play before everything becomes a foul-mouthed back alley wrapped up in a thin MMO tortilla.

    2. Re:Just give us the option by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry if you just don't get it, that solution isn't good enough. It's not about naughty words, it's about hate speech. I don't want to see it, I don't want my kids exposed to it -- regardless of whether I (or they) can choose to add someone to an ignore list after the fact.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:Just give us the option by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      I like to play multiplayer games, so I'm in a bit of a different boat than you. But there's always the 'no chat' or 'friends only' options in most MMOs; whether they have good solo content is another matter.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    4. Re:Just give us the option by necrognome · · Score: 1

      Then your only solution is to game with folks you know or folks who have been vouched for (directly or transitively by n degrees*) by folks you know.

      * n may have an upper bound of 6, if you believe the word on the street.

      --


      Let's get drunk and delete production data!
    5. Re:Just give us the option by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      I play FPS MMOs so I encourage people to constantly type messages. Anyone standing around not moving and chatting instead is a much easier target.

      I find the people who spam-chat the worst. If it was mildly funny the first time, it isn't funny the 100th time. Then there are the people who freak out over it and by doing so only ecourage the spammers to keep doing it.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    6. Re:Just give us the option by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      The problem with ignore is that it doesn't discourage the behavior itself. You're basically saying "It's okay to be a racist, sexist, offensive douchebag because if people don't like it they can ignore. Carry on with the hate speech!"

      You give the impression that it is socially acceptable behavior in your game, when (In my opinion) it is not acceptable.

    7. Re:Just give us the option by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You have no clue, do you? You've never raised kids, have you? Until you have, STFU and GBTW.

      I have my preferences, you have yours. Big fucking deal. If there are a lot of people like me out there, why shouldn't a game company cater to us? It's not like the people like you and the people like me can't both be satisfied.

      Or you could teach the children to ignore it and thicken their skins a little, but hey, since daddy can't and would rather be shielded from all the naughty words and thoughts than just do the same, why should they?
      Seriously, get a clue before you spout off your nonsense. If you ever have kids, you'll learn that parenting is not easy, and that making sure your kids are exposed to the right influences is one of the keys to ensuring that they establish behavior patterns that are healthy for them. Teaching them to be able to handle bad situations and assholes is important, but I want to be able to do that on my own terms. Then again, I *care* how my kids turn out, so the above may not apply to you.
      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    8. Re:Just give us the option by Captain+Sarcastic · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      <tsk, tsk, tsk> Watch the blood pressure there... you seem to be overheating.

      I would respectfully submit that, as a parent, the original poster is doing no less than a parental duty in trying to prevent the kids from being exposed to some of the shrecklichkeit that is out there until the parent (as opposed to some bozo who wants to be the first one who tells the kids that there is no Santa) determines that the children are ready.

      However, I don't see any suggestions that the game providers be sued, or that a law be passed forcing the providers to screen such nastiness. The only suggestion is that of voting with one's wallet. Is that so wrong?

      --
      Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
    9. Re:Just give us the option by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Currently, you're right. But, as I mentioned, it would be possible tob have a server dedicated to "playing nice." Sure, it'll get violated sometimes, but bannination of offending accounts to other servers will really cut down on it.

      Hell, I'd pay extra for a "playing nice" server, just to have a dedicated admin to investigate complaints.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    10. Re:Just give us the option by metamorphage · · Score: 0

      I find it ironic that your signature is about trolls and yet you are responding to one repeatedly. However, assuming you are talking about World of Warcraft, you can remove yourself from all of the in-game channels, which I have found eliminates pretty much everything I wouldn't want to read. You can't make yourself immune to tells, unfortunately, but the only spam that comes through there is about buying gold.

    11. Re:Just give us the option by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Just because I recognize a troll doesn't mean I don't have fun responding to them sometimes :)

      I don't play WoW, but I like to be able to chat in-game, so what I'd prefer is to have the channels open but not crap-flooded... that may be too much to ask :)

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    12. Re:Just give us the option by necrognome · · Score: 1

      I don't know how old your kids are, but you may want to give Disney's ToonTown a try. Asshattery is absolutely verboten there. Although it's kind of a "kiddie" game, you can have quite a bit of clean fun and foolishness with cartoon avatars.

      --


      Let's get drunk and delete production data!
    13. Re:Just give us the option by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      You're assuming he doesn't consider himself to be one of the Olog-hai referenced in his sig. ;)

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    14. Re:Just give us the option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you drive or walk your children to an from school, sit with them all day, never let them out of your sight, just in case the might hear something you find offensive? There are bad people out in the real world too, you know. Better get them a helmet too. Wouldn't want them to hurt their little heads if they fell down. oh, maybe knee and elbow pads too. You know, just to be on the safe side, you could lock them in a padded room. That way they protected from all the bad people and wouldn't accidentally hurt themselves.

      Dr. Spock has nothing on me. I should write a parenting book!

  6. It is not only the Barrens by linzeal · · Score: 1

    Seriously, when I group with people and they have vent or Team Speak I am not amazed that most of them do not have any relationship except with their mom upstairs. When my girlfriend comes on the microphone at least half the time they make lewd remarks. I am using a decent headset is there a way to filter out background noise or make it just broadcast my voice?

    1. Re:It is not only the Barrens by MooseMuffin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      is there a way to filter out background noise or make it just broadcast my voice?

      I implore anyone who uses voicechat to use some kind of push-to-talk button. I don't want to hear you breathing. I don't want to hear you argue with your mom. I basically don't need to hear you unless you saying something you want me to hear.
    2. Re:It is not only the Barrens by fistfullast33l · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I really do think Trash talking is bad in general chat most often than not. I think it's the anonymity that's granted by being behind the computer. That's why when people find a good group of players, they stick with them. There was a great clan I ran with in Planetside like that which basically enforced the trash talk rules, and whose members were mature enough that trash talk wasn't necessary or tolerated. In general I don't participate in chat unless it's to coordinate strategy or whatnot, or they're just talking about offtopic stuff that doesn't flame opinions. Otherwise, it's useless.

    3. Re:It is not only the Barrens by SlamMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not really (its a TS/Vent issue - they don't implement it), but our solution is to just recommend using a push to talk key. Mouse Button 4 for me.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    4. Re:It is not only the Barrens by toolie · · Score: 1

      Are you saying TS and Vent don't have push to talk?

      --
      -- toolie
    5. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't stand voice chat, I don't want to be trying to distinguish that many voices and relate them to the characters they're playing. Especially when we have men/boys playing females.

    6. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't want to use push to talk, TS allows you to bind a key combination that mutes or unmutes the mic. The TS announcer voice will even say "Microphone muted" when you do it, so you know the command got through. That's what I use whenever I need to talk to someone in real life. Arguments broadcast over TS are unbelievably embarrassing! (I have heard a few...)

    7. Re:It is not only the Barrens by SlamMan · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, I'm saying Vent/TS don't do an especially good job at handling their VOX, so you should use push to talk (which they have and support).

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    8. Re:It is not only the Barrens by fitten · · Score: 1

      Yup... I don't play WoW anymore (haven't for over a year) but I do play other games. Push-to-talk is required when we're on Vent. There's nothing more annoying than having someone go AFK but you can hear them talking with someone else in the background, or hear them eating/drinking near the microphone, or even worse, have them sneeze/cough and blow your eardrums out.

    9. Re:It is not only the Barrens by El+Gigante+de+Justic · · Score: 1

      Two more annoying possibilties - 1) Heavy breathers who have their mike threshold way to low 2) People that don't use push to talk and are using speakers and a mike instead of a headset.

    10. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Coan_teen · · Score: 2, Informative

      My boyfriend only voicechats with people he knows in real life, but I have no doubt the same would be true if he chatted with strangers and I came on the mic.

      I avoid contact with people in online games. If this means I miss out on quests, fine. I didn't get into gaming to meet people - I got into gaming to get away from them. I've seen the way my fifty-something mother gets hit on by idiotic 17-year-old boys on WoW, and I'm not interested in that. I just want to run around killing things and gathering items.

      There seems to be a fundamental difference between players who use the game to escape from their life and those who use the game as their life. The latter are the ones who tend to be obnoxious.

      "Do you want to be my enchantress?"

      Um, no.

      --
      A Sherman can give you a very nice...edge.
    11. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Three things you can do. 1) Encourage/enforce push-to-talk buttons. Especially good if someone with server admin is half worth their weight and starts globally muting people. 2) Individually mute those who you find have a very poor signal/noise ratio. To hell with them if they have anything worth saying and are muted because they're retarded. 3) Don't play with retards.

    12. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My girlfriend was asked by a kid in Stormwind the other day, "Will u b my master?"

    13. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I basically don't need to hear you unless you saying something you want me to hear.

      But... But I want you to hear me breathing, arguing with my mom, opening and drinking beers, making cute noises at the cat, and masturbating furiously.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    14. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      Don't forget this. Last panel in particular.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    15. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      This, I mean. Next time, I need to turn on html the first time I post. Also, this.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    16. Re:It is not only the Barrens by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I could never get push-to-talk working with Teamspeak. I'm running Linux, running WoW through cedega. It seems to be a focus issue. If the teamspeak window has focus, push-to-talk works. Otherwise, no. That doesn't help me much when the WoW window needs focus.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    17. Re:It is not only the Barrens by devnull17 · · Score: 1

      My WoW guild also contains a "Linux commie," as my guildmates have termed him. He uses Ventrilo, and has the same problem. He can hear, but not speak. I think it's codec-related in his case, though.

    18. Re:It is not only the Barrens by C0R1D4N · · Score: 1

      I avoid contact with people in online games. If this means I miss out on quests, fine. I didn't get into gaming to meet people - I got into gaming to get away from them. I've seen the way my fifty-something mother gets hit on by idiotic 17-year-old boys on WoW, and I'm not interested in that. I just want to run around killing things and gathering items. Then why don't you just play Oblivion?
  7. They are just words. by loafula · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Thats how I feel about profanity. Words. Nothing more, nothing less. Why the fuck do people get so upset when other people say fuck?

    --
    FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
    1. Re:They are just words. by svendsen · · Score: 1

      There was some show on HBO awhile back called DeadWoor (or something) basically set during thr gold rush era. My fiance and I watched one show and that was it. The language was so hrash and so often it took away from our enjoyment.

      Now I am used to bad language woked many years in a Bar as a bouncer/bartender. But even that show was too much for me.

    2. Re:They are just words. by loafula · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I completely understand that people are offended by foul language, but I don't understand why. The only reason I see for people to take offense is that it's learned behavior- i.e. "Those words upset me cause mommy and daddy told me they should."

      --
      FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
    3. Re:They are just words. by nomadic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Just words"? Language is the core of human culture. Language affects emotion, if it didn't literature, poetry, song--these things would be pretty much pointless. If language can create positive emotions, why is it so hard to believe it can create negative ones?

      Plus I love the English language. If you have to put profanity in every sentence, you're doing a lousy job of speaking it, and that annoys me. It's like watching someone drive a ferrari without knowing how to shift; it makes me wince.

    4. Re:They are just words. by Knara · · Score: 1

      Um... you mean Deadwood?

    5. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 2, Insightful

      General rule: if a=b and b=c, then a=c. Therefore: If 'poo' isn't offensive to you, and 'shit' is equivalent to 'poo', then 'shit' should not be offensive to you. There is no inherent property in words which makes them 'bad'. If there is a euphamism or generally accepted substitute for the 'bad word', then it is not really bad. Check your premise, 'offended' people.

    6. Re:They are just words. by svendsen · · Score: 1

      Oh ya that's it. As I said watched it only once...

    7. Re:They are just words. by svendsen · · Score: 1

      No I don't think that's it.

      my 2 cents:

      I think when you have a situation where swearing is appropriate to the movie/show/etc then it works. When it just seems to use it after every other word I think it shows a lack of imagination on the writers part. I need a verb...fuck...I need a name...fuck...I need a subject...fuck. Ya know? A lot of swearing in DeadWood just seemed out of place and ruined the actual conversations..

    8. Re:They are just words. by loafula · · Score: 1

      Well said.

      --
      FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
    9. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Thanks :) I replied to you because you were the only voice of reason I saw ITT. I've been saying this for years, and for some reason (learned social behaviour is my guess) not many people seem to get it. Mostly, I get responses along the lines of, "Yeah, well....those words are just bad. You just have to accept it." To which I reply, "No."

    10. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I'm just curious here: would your reaction have been the same if they used 'darn' or 'golly' (or 'blankety' or 'ted' or 'um') instead of whatever they used? If you answered 'yes', then your point holds up. If you answered 'no', then you're a victim of learned behaviour. Not trying to be critical, but it is EXTREMELY difficult to change your perspective enough to see unconsciously learned behaviour.

    11. Re:They are just words. by SevenDigitUID · · Score: 1

      General rule: if a=b and b=c, then a=c. Therefore: If 'poo' isn't offensive to you, and 'shit' is equivalent to 'poo', then 'shit' should not be offensive to you. There is no inherent property in words which makes them 'bad'. If there is a euphamism or generally accepted substitute for the 'bad word', then it is not really bad. Check your premise, 'offended' people. By the same logic, why don't you just say poo? Does "poo" or "poop" or "poopie" have some inherent property that makes you feel childish when you use it?

      Perhaps the properties are not inherent to the words, but they are present nonetheless. Language has nuance, and its important. We let words have subtle shades so that we can use them to show what kind of person we are, what kind of mood we are in, who we are addressing, or what kind of reaction we want. Bang, Fuck, Screw, Make Love, Do it, Have Sex all mean the same basic thing, but they each have a more subtle meaning and people choose which word they use based on how they feel and what they want to communicate.

      This isn't stupid, its important. I like that I can have one word to tell my daughter that she did a good job going poo, and another word to tell a coworker that his work looks like shit. Having a wide range of words with different positive and negative connotations lets me communicate more effectively.

      If you want to argue that people shouldn't be so easily and deeply offended, go for it. But don't for a second think that all words with similar definitions should be equal.

      Check your premise, it's double plus un good.
    12. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I would agree with you if it were concepts we were discussing here. However, it isn't the concepts that people object to. It's the words themselves. Every 'bad' word has several if not many socially acceptable analogues. How do you explain this?

    13. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Can you please point out to me what distinguishes the 'good'-nuanced words from the 'bad'-nuanced ones? I'm not rejecting your assertion that nuance is important, I'm rejecting the theory that some words are 'bad' when they have 'non-bad' equivalents. I agree with you that certain connotations are more important in certain situations. However, that doesn't explain why words with extremely similar connotations ("crap" and "shit", for example) aren't similarly viewed by society. Who decided which words are 'bad' and which ones are 'acceptable'? What was the criteria? My premise is fine. As to why not just use 'poo' all the time, I would have no problem with that. I didn't bring my personal choices into the discussion because I don't see why they're relevant. We aren't talking about my habits, after all, we're talking about societal conventions.

    14. Re:They are just words. by svendsen · · Score: 1

      Depends really. If they used golly once in a blue moon I'd be fine, it they used it as often as the work fuck ya I wouldn't watch it. it wasn't the word by itself which caused me to turn it off more of using in such a manner which detracted from the overall enjoyment of the show

      I'd rather have a show with swearing and good writing vs. swearing and bad writing or no swearing and bad writing

    15. Re:They are just words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      General rule: if a=b and b=c, then a=c. Therefore: If 'poo' isn't offensive to you, and 'shit' is equivalent to 'poo', then 'shit' should not be offensive to you.
      Quite true. The flaw in your logic is quite simply that for most people "shit" is not equivalent to "poo". The two words have different semantic ranges, and while both of them include "faeces" as a core meaning, it is nonsensical to suggest that the English language has somehow managed to accumulate such massive redundancy that we have dozens of words that are totally interchangeable.

      There is no inherent property in words which makes them 'bad'.
      Also perfectly true. A word in itself is just a symbol. However, a word in itself is irrelevant, because we aren't talking about words in the abstract - we're talking about human beings using words, and that implies context and intent.
    16. Re:They are just words. by kosanovich · · Score: 1

      What you say is true but you twist it in a profoundly stupid way.

      To say that being offended by foul language is a learned behavior is obviously the case, but you present it as though only childish people would let a learned behavior influence them. The statement "Those words upset me cause mommy and daddy told me they should." is obviously meant to belittle people who have learned that offensive language is offensive.

      My question is what in life isn't learned? Did you pop out of your mom and look at the sky and say "hey that's what the color blue looks like"? Chances are you look at blue objects and know they are blue because your "mommy and daddy" told you they are. WOW what a loser to grow up and be confined by some learned behavior!

      The reason people are offended by offensive language (i know it sounds simple when stated like that but i'll continue to explain in case it's still not clear) is because when people are learning the language they speak, they learn that when people say certain things they are trying to be... wait for it... offensive. What purpose does the word fuck have in the English language other than to be offensive? It can add meaning to a phrase but because of the way it has been defined in our language (as an obscenity) it adds that meaning in an offensive manner. Is it so unreasonable that someone gets offended by an offensive word?

      I can understand not wanting it to be offensive, but since the word first appeared around the 1500s and has been considered obscene since then i doubt you'll have much luck getting it changed.

      Also for all those who get upset that crap isn't obscene while shit is. Is it really so amazing that the language has a non obscene way of saying the same thing? Saying "I had sex with my wife" is not nearly as vulgar as saying "I fucked my wife" yet people take issue that "ah crap" is seen as not vulgar while "holy shit" is. Sorry but it's the way language works. There are different ways of conveying information and emotions and the fact that there are two different words that covey the same meaning but different emotions is a good thing, get over it (though they are much better ways of expressing yourself than using words like crap all the time).

    17. Re:They are just words. by vux984 · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing you have no appreciation for poetry. Language isn't simple arithmetic.

      a is sort of like b, and b is sort of like c, and a well its sort of like c too. They aren't equivalent. Even if they both refer to the same steaming turd on the kitchen floor.

      'poo' doesn't equal 'shit' doesn't equal 'turd' doesn't equal 'feces'...

      Words have all sorts of associative baggage, nuance, and other elements. If you choose to use a euphemism, that choice is carried along with the sentence, and adds nuance to it. Even contractions; if someone says "do not" vs "don't" there can be nuance and meaning inherent in that choice. Perhaps they wished to emphasize 'not'. Or perhaps the extra syllable shifts how the sentence is balanced.

      In a language where mere inflection or the placement of a pause can change the intended meaning of an entire sentence, or even invert its meaning, the suggestion that different words are simply equivalent is sheer idiocy.

    18. Re:They are just words. by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      It certainly would ruin it for me. Using any word excessively just because you like how it sounds is aggravating. Case in point: my roommate a few years back just got his first honest-to-goodness girlfriend. He was happy. Good for him and all that. Unfortunately, due to watching too many TV shows or something, he insisted on calling her "baby" as often as possible. It didn't even sound natural as he always found some way to force it into the conversation. Conversations generally went along the lines of:

      "Hey Baby whats up? Baby are you watching TV again Baby? Baby, I need to get a better TV for you Baby. Then, Baby, we can watch all the shows that you want to together Baby. Baby, Baby, you don't want an SDTV Baby. Trust me Baby, HDTV is the way to go Baby.".

      Twenty minutes of that and I was ready to start searching for ways to hide a body. Apparently she found it annoying too though - it didn't last very long.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    19. Re:They are just words. by kosanovich · · Score: 1

      then you're a victim of learned behaviour. Welcome to society where we learn from a young age how to interact with each other.

      Are you honestly saying that following a learned behavior is bad? When you say that you are "a victim" of your learning it sounds like you are. The alternatives to learned behavior is either knowing everything you know from the start of your existence, or acting on pure instincts. Either way if you are saying you are not a "victim" of learned behaviors then you would be a very interesting case study.

    20. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that the meaning is exactly the same. It depends on your level of precision. 1.1 != 1 unless you're only expressing it to the nearest whole number. Think of it this way: "shit" = 1.0000000. "crap" = 1.0001. At the level of granularity that makes most sense for the discussion, they are equivalent. If you go deeper, they are different. This is just a rough description since I didn't expect anyone (especially someone so attuned to nuance) to miss this point.
      I'm just saying that it makes no sense at all to take a concept with 500 ways of expressing said concept and then say that ONE of those ways is unacceptable.
      Please provide me with an explanation for this and I'll concede the point. We have a ton of differently-nuanced words for "no", but we don't arbitrarily label one of them 'bad'. Why not? There are plenty of different ways of saying 'mad' or 'happy' or 'rain' but none of them are labelled 'bad'. Why not? Who chose which concepts would have 'bad' synonyms and which of those synonyms would be 'bad'? What, exactly, differentiates the 'bad' word from the acceptable versions?
      I really don't see why I'm getting personally attacked for this. Why would you conclude that I can't appreciate poetry? I must be a moron because I enojy logic and reason? Or logical, reasonable people aren't capable of understanding poetry? What?

    21. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Welcome to society where we learn from a young age how to interact with each other.

      Are you honestly saying that following a learned behavior is bad? When you say that you are "a victim" of your learning it sounds like you are. The alternatives to learned behavior is either knowing everything you know from the start of your existence, or acting on pure instincts. Either way if you are saying you are not a "victim" of learned behaviors then you would be a very interesting case study.


      Are you honestly saying that all learned behaviour is good?
      In this case, I believe that the particular example I gave of learned behaviour IS bad. Not in every case. I said 'a victim' because in this case, I believe learned behaviour to be harmful. Please note that this does not mean that I think all learned behaviour is bad, nor did I expect anyone to come to that conclusion.

    22. Re:They are just words. by gknoy · · Score: 1

      Great points. It's the intent that matters, as well as the words chosen.

      If I'm in a game, and someone starts calling me gay, or a Jew, or a pig-[bleep]ing-[bleep]er, I know that they want to insult me, etc. Many times, I feel it's inappropriate. Saying someone is unskilled, or whatnot, can be done without reverting to profanity.

      Also, for parents of young children, we'd rather they not hear profanity and use it in everyday conversation. I'd rather my kids didn't ask me, "Daddy, what's a hoe-biscuit?", just as I'd rather they didn't moon their teachers.

      Do I accept some cursing? Of course. When bad things happen, my raid leaders curse in voice-chat, or when I get frutrated I will curse also. I do NOT, however, broadcast that over voice chat or in-game chat (unless I'm *very* frustrated, and even then I try not to).

      I prefer that my gaming nights not consist of people calling each other homos, faggots, douchebags, or various racial slurs; nor would I like to hear them filled with a nonstop parroting of the F word. I can listen to rap music for that, and choose not to. This is the main reason that I never could stomache playing on public Counterstrike servers. (I can accept that I suck as a player -- and played for a long time on a server where I was not the best by a LONG shot, yet where the atmosphere was mature and people were banned for cursing. (I even got one for typo-ing "shotgun" as "shitgnu". ;))

      Muting general chat (and trade ;)) goes a long way towards keeping the frustration level low in my WoW time.

    23. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Quite true. The flaw in your logic is quite simply that for most people "shit" is not equivalent to "poo". The two words have different semantic ranges, and while both of them include "faeces" as a core meaning, it is nonsensical to suggest that the English language has somehow managed to accumulate such massive redundancy that we have dozens of words that are totally interchangeable.

      They are equivalent enough to be synonyms.
      From Dictionary.com:

      Synonym
      1. a word having the same or nearly the same meaning as another in the language, as joyful, elated, glad.
      2. a word or expression accepted as another name for something, as Arcadia for pastoral simplicity; metonym.

      If it were just nuance that made words bad, then there would be more than ONE 'bad' word per concept. What I am against is the arbitrariness that makes ONE way of expressing a concept "bad" simply because of the choice of letters used to spell the word which indicates that concept. Therefore, I understand your point but I think you're getting WAYYYYYYYY too into particulars here, and you still haven't provided anything to differentiate one synonym from another in such a way that one should be proscribed while another should not.

    24. Re:They are just words. by kosanovich · · Score: 1

      In this case, I believe that the particular example I gave of learned behaviour IS bad. Not in every case. I said 'a victim' because in this case, I believe learned behaviour to be harmful. How is it harmful that someone learns that certain words are offensive and is consequently offended by them? Wouldn't it be more harmful if you didn't fully understand the meaning of the words commonly used in your primary language?

    25. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. What you said represents a logical, reasoned position. That is something which none of the fanatical 'anti-cussing' people can seem to provide.

    26. Re:They are just words. by sdhankin · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was listening to a historian on NPR talk about Deadwood, and he assured us all that, despite the "wince-effect" it has on modern ears, folks in that era and location actually spoke that way. We had that same reaction as you did when we first started watching, but it eventually sounded no stranger than listening to Shakepeare's plays - a little odd at first, then you just adjust.

      Too bad you stopped watching - it was an incredibly good series while it lasted.

    27. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      It's harmful because it's arbitrary and it teaches poor critical thinking skills. There is no reason for why the particular words which society labels 'unacceptable' are so labelled. If there was logic behind it I wouldn't think it harmful. If the CONCEPTS were labelled bad I would understand it. But they are not. It is perfectly acceptable to express an idea using certain words, but unacceptable to express it with 'bad' words. That is nonsensical and that is why I believe it to be harmful.

    28. Re:They are just words. by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1
      Not necessarily. Words have meaning outside of their dictionary meaning or even outside of a euphemism. They're also used to emphasize other words or show the state of mind of the speaker. So asking someone if there equally offended by "poo" as they are by "shit" doesn't take context into account.

      Otherwise does "look a the fucking snow" mean the same as "observe the snow, it fornicates" or "gee, there's sure a bunch of snow out there" or "there's too much snow out there for me to get to my car?"?

    29. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Please explain the difference between 'look at the fucking snow' and 'look at the freaking snow' other than that you can say one on t.v. and not the other. I'm not looking for how each makes you feel, either, as your feelings are irrelevant to the fundamental meaning of the sentence, considering that your feelings may not be shared by others. I'm looking for a concrete, logical difference.

    30. Re:They are just words. by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      I more or less agree with you, but just want to point out something. I don't think any word by itself is bad, nor can it ever be bad. A word is just a word, it's a building block to express a concept. What could be seen as bad is the underlying concept and as such the way certain words are used in sentences, or how certain sentences are used could be construed as bad. For instance, I could say "When people resort to personal attacks against someone in an attempt to defend their position, that's a really shitty thing to do" and that would be an acceptable thing because it conveys accurately my feeling on a topic in a effective manner, and the concept is not objectionable. If on the other hand I said "All these people are full of shit" that would be unacceptable because the concept is without merit. It wasn't he use of the word shit that made either one acceptable or not, but the intent behind it. This is the concept everyone seems to be so completely incapable of grasping. Saying fuck after something bad has happened and your upset is perfectly fine, you're expressing your opinion, and if others don't care to listen to your opinion then they can ignore you, or avoid you. Putting an outright ban on the use of the word fuck however is totally missing the point.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    31. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Good point.

    32. Re:They are just words. by MyIS · · Score: 1

      That's oversimplifying things a bit. It is learned behaviour, but not because "mommy and daddy" told us to dislike those words (nice patronizing there, dude). Those words happen to be associated with anger, malice, frustration, simply because that's what *everyone* intends them to mean. Due to that, there is a knee-jerk apprehensive reaction even just from hearing that same word. Nothing wrong with that, just how we all (even you) work. And I, personally, would rather not have that reaction invoked unless it is actually necessary. I appreciate swearing when I am upset, because it relieves the tension; but abusing foul language is simply annoying and devaluing its "proper" use.

      Not a perfect comparison, but imagine if everyone kept saying "murder, rape, murder" in casual conversation online?

      Anyway, kids swear exactly because their mommy and daddy told them not to. But that's just how kids work anyway. There should be just a "skill testing question" or a 18+ age requirement for the game, that's it. Not that the real solution would be that simple either.

      --
      http://zero-to-enterprise.blogspot.com/
    33. Re:They are just words. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Venn diagrams, learn about them back in the day? They are synonyms because they have the same meaning in some contexts. For instance, their dictionary meanings are very similar. We call this denotation, because we explicitly state the meaning.

      But there are also connotations, which are the "unsaid" parts of a word's meaning. A good dictionary will mention these as well, but it will have to be updated frequently, because they change faster than the 'official' meaning.

      For instance, gate has a specific meaning: a device which can be opened to control access to some area. But the suffix -gate has a very different meaning in certain very specific contexts. Ever since a particular event in the early 70s, it has come to imply a scandal of some sort, usually grand, and is derived from the name of a popular Washington hotel.

      As another example, how many times have you called someone a bastard whose parents were not unwed at the time of their conception? And why is that considered to be insulting in the first place?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    34. Re:They are just words. by Angostura · · Score: 1

      So they're exact synonyms? Then tell me. Why does the word 'shit' actually exist, and why does it continue to be used? Do you use the word "poo" all the time, if not, why not?

    35. Re:They are just words. by loafula · · Score: 1

      The mommy and daddy reference was a metaphor dumbed down to a level anyone could understand. I could have gone into a rant about censorship, moral values, the FCC and jesus; but frankly, I didn't want to type so much. While attaching an emotion to a word is as good an answer to my question as any, it simply reiterates the fact that you associate these words with feelings you have been conditioned to associate them with. I can say "eat crap" with the same inflection and emotion I use when saying "eat shit". My intended meaning of either statement is exactly the same. The only difference is in who hears it. If I can evoke an emotional response in someone with a word, not a personal attack, but a word, than it's an advantage I have over them. I believe we can become desensitized to the vulgarity of profanities. Look at how much more often we're hearing "ass" or "damn" on prime time television. These words lost some of their flare in the last 15 years or so. Has the meaning of these words changed? Not one bit. People are just used to hearing them, and they have become disassociated with their emotions. Why can't this happen to dirtier, meaner words like fuck, shit and cunt? Why empower the words so much?

      --
      FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
    36. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      When did I say they were 'exact' synonyms? Are you saying they are NOT synonyms?

      I do not dispute that different words are appropriate for different situations. I do not dispute that some words have nuances that synonyms may not have. I DO dispute that some synonyms are 'bad' and shouldn't be used while some are just fine and may be used at any time.

    37. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I am not disputing that connotations may be different. I am asking (and I will be bold and predict that I will never get a logical answer to this question) "Why are a few words considered unacceptable when they all have many, many socially-acceptable synonyms, most of which were designed to get around the societal stigma of saying the 'bad' word in the first place? "
      For example: does anyone over the age of 5 have any trouble figuring out what words are 'bleeped' on T.V.? No. Yet 'bleeping' is completely socially acceptable. The EXACT same message is conveyed, as people simply 'plug in' the missing word mentally as they're hearing the 'bleep'. What is the difference? Is it to protect the ears of the young, who would not understand what they were hearing anyway?

    38. Re:They are just words. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      They are strong words that can be very effective when used appropriately. When abused they just get annoying. Anyone who has to use fuck every 5 seconds just shows they have a poor vocabulary and are not worth listening to.

    39. Re:They are just words. by loafula · · Score: 1

      I can intend a statement to mean the exact same thing, with or without profanity. I can also use profanity without intending anger, malice or frustration (That's fucking awesome!!).

      Using murder, rape, murder in casual conversation is fine by me. As is using fuck, shit and whore. If I am having a conversation with somebody and I hear these words from their mouth, in conversation, it does not phase me one bit. I am likely to use the same words myself, in conversation. If someone is listening to our conversation and is offended just by the words we are saying, it's their problem. They overhear the conversation, take the words out of context, and deem them bad based only on their personal feelings attached to the words. Now if someone says a profanity to someone else in order to attack that person, the offense taken is warranted. But this is also true of words that aren't profane.

      Kids don't swear because mommy and daddy tell them not to. Kids swear because of the power people give these words.

      --
      FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
    40. Re:They are just words. by Caffeinate · · Score: 1

      Bang, Fuck, Screw, Make Love, Do it, Have Sex all mean the same basic thing . . . I agree; they all mean the same BASIC thing, but I think we all know that we're doing two totally different things when we "make love" to someone versus "fucking" them.
      --
      Godless heathen.
    41. Re:They are just words. by MeanderingMind · · Score: 1

      There's nothing inherently bad about an explicitive. The problem is that there are a great many people who defile these and other words. "Why the fuck did WoW just crash?" is acceptable usage for me. "Y fucking cock fucker WoW fuckingdkfickkc damn fuck whore piss crash!:!:!>!!>" is a blight upon humanity.

      Explicitives mean very little when you don't save them for when they're important. No one pays attention when someone know to litter their cusses with other words drops a "fuck" or two. When some pious grandmother who'd never hurt a fly or swear drops a "Damn it", it's noticed.

      Moderation in all things.

      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    42. Re:They are just words. by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Why would you conclude that I can't appreciate poetry?

      Because you asserted that different words are equivalent. More than that you asserted they were equivalent by transitivity.

      Transitive equality coupled with imprecision results in absurdity. A person who enjoys logic and reason should realize that:

      If "1.1 = 1.0 for our purposes" then:

      1.0 = 1.1 = 1.2 = 1.3 = 1.4 = 1.5 = 1.6 = 1.7 = 1.8 = 1.9 = 2.0

      So by transitive equality 1 = 2, (and really anything equals anything else).
      Equality is transitive, 'almost equal' is NOT.

      What, exactly, differentiates the 'bad' word from the acceptable versions?

      Societal norms in the 'associative baggage'. "Fuck off" is offensive precisely because its normal use in society at large is precisely to incite offense. That is -why- people choose that phrase over 'Get lost' or 'Please leave'. All three mean the same thing at some level, that speaker wishes the other to leave or cease what they are doing. But when you choose 'fuck off' you are sending that message not only that you want the other to leave, but that you want to offend them, that you wish to convey a complete and utter lack of respect for them in addition to wanting them to leave.

      Of course, its more complex than that; 'society' isn't a homogeneous blob; there are subgroups and words within those groups take on different or additional semantics; and context matters too. Words like 'nigger' or 'redneck' can mean entirely different things depending on who is speaking them, and who is listening. Saying fuck off to a friend might be entirely different than saying it to the sweet little old lady at the mall, both in terms of what you meant to convey, and what you actually conveyed. When you say 'fuck off' to someone you have a rapport with then the desire to offend or convey disrespect might be 'tongue in cheek'; you know that he won't be horrendously offended, and your just playing with the language.

      A lack of sensitivity to this itself speaks volumes.

      To spew profanity into a public chat channel is either a deliberate show of insensitivity with the desire to offend at least part of the participants, or a display of just how ignorant you are (either you are ignorant that the words are offensive to a lot of people, or that you are ignorant that those people might be present in a public chat channel).

      Some words are offensive because large groups within society attach offensive semantics to them. Those words are used by them to convey disrespect and offense. Simply using them is a cue to the listener that you have no respect for them and want to rub their faces in it. For the listener that is WHY people use those words, and if the listener were to use the words that would be what *they* would be trying to convey.

    43. Re:They are just words. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      if poo = shit then we wouldn't have two different words for it. Language is far more complex than that, and there is a great deal of context, implication, and meaning tied to words beyond their dictionary definitions.

      For example: 'Fuck', 'Sleep with', and 'Make love to' all mean functionally the same thing, sex. But each phrase adds context and emotion to the act. Choosing to ignore those subtle differences doesn't make you better than those who do not. In fact, it is more likely the opposite, as you fail to appreciate or even recognize the finer details of interpersonal communication.

    44. Re:They are just words. by Canthros · · Score: 1

      How thoroughly delightful. We shall all talk like uncultured bores, saying the sorts of things that our betters would not in polite company, and be callow with respect to the feelings of our fellows. What fun! How enlightened we must be, and not at all like those dregs of society whose minds cannot conjure up suitably polite conversation out of their limited vocabularies.

      Or, we could talk like decent people, and at least limit the use of profanities and obscenities for those times when we are simply too overcome with emotion to remember social niceties like good manners and proper behavior. At the very least, there are perfectly useful terms that are neither childish (as 'poo') nor vulgar (as 'shit') nor technical (as 'feces') when such things must be discussed in polite company. Or are you unfamiliar with 'manure'? Presumably, you are an adult. Might be time to start using language like one. Unless you enjoy looking like an uncouth oaf.

      'Shit' is unacceptable in polite society, primarily because it is vulgar. It's crass. If you have to have that explained, then this conversation isn't worth having. You're either too poorly acculturated to be educated in this limited space, or you're being intentionally thick, whether for your own amusement or in the belabored service of some 'point' about how we should all behave like jackanapes because social distinctions are artificial. (As if that observation were novel or deep: of course good manners are largely artificial. Were they not, your dog would know to keep his elbows off the table and to eat with a knife and fork.) That society is so degraded that polite society is hard to find is no excuse to pretend that politeness is without value.

      --
      Canthros
    45. Re:They are just words. by Canthros · · Score: 1

      For starters, 'freak' is not an obscenity. 'Fuck', in all its forms, is.

      --
      Canthros
    46. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      True. However, that's a function of the repetition and not the repeated word. Same thing goes for someone who uses 'um' or 'like' every other word....yet those aren't 'bad' words.

    47. Re:They are just words. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Perhaps because people think that young children do not have the capability to understand the connotations of the words, and will use them indiscriminately? (Which is pretty much what happens in online voice comms)

      Not saying that bleeping works, just I can understand the motive. They are words that often abandon their traditional definitions depending on context. (Often abandoning any meaning at all) You can't expect kids to fully understand these words when they're still getting their heads around the relatively simple aspects of language.

    48. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      'make love' is an obscenity? 'have intercourse' is an obscenity? 'make whoopie' is an obscenity? well, since you're obviously such an authority on obscenity, what makes something obscene?

    49. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      How can we expect kids to ever understand why those words are bad when it is quite apparent that no ADULTS understand it either? Why does it MATTER if kids use them? All I keep getting, over and over, is that they're bad because they're obscene because they're foul because they're swear words. Argh.

    50. Re:They are just words. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Every time I see "its teh internet i dont ned to typ gud" I die just a little bit inside.

      I've been of the opinion for several years that the internet will destroy language as we know it. It seems that people have no respect for language, which is probably the single most important thing to happen to human development.

    51. Re:They are just words. by slartibart · · Score: 1

      What is the difference? Is it to protect the ears of the young, who would not understand what they were hearing anyway?

      It's kind of silly, since adults who don't want to hear "f*ck" have to do some mental gymnastics NOT to insert it over the bleep. But the purpose where kids are concerned is clear: to avoid teaching them the word. They might not understand the word the first time they hear it, but kids DO figure things out from context. Let them sit through a showing of the movie "The Departed", by the end they'll know exactly what it means. (see this to show how many times the word is used) http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1746444

    52. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      You still have yet to explain why only a few particular words are considered foul. That has absolutely nothing to do with culture nor sophistication. How is it cultured and sophisticated to parrot learned, irrational behaviour? You keep telling me that I should limit profanities without ever explaining why they're profane. You give me the same tautology that everyone else so far has: They're bad words because they're obscenities because they're crass because they're bad words. Are you truly that unintelligent? I have no problem with artificial limits on behaviour. I just expect them to MAKE SENSE. For example, eating with utensils can reduce the amount of cleanup necessary after a meal. Keeping elbows off the table can prevent spills. Asking for something to be passed rather than reaching for it also prevents spills and things like sleeves in the gravy, etc. These are RATIONAL REASONS for artificial behaviours. Now, please explain to me the RATIONAL reason behind making a few words 'bad' while euphamisms for those very same words, used only because of the societal stigma attached to the 'bad' words, are perfectly acceptable. Go on, you're cultured and sophisticated. Should be easy for you.

    53. Re:They are just words. by SevenDigitUID · · Score: 1

      Who decided and how what words would have each good/bad meaning? I guess I can only answer that with another question and then a guess- who decided what any word means?

      I would suppose that its gradual over time, and different in different communities. Thats how language evolves after all. I would suppose that "ass" would have been pretty offensive 20 years ago to my mother. I doubt it is today. "Gay" would have been a fine way to describe my happy-go-lucky grandfather 50 years ago, but he'd not appreciate it today. Telling a 15 year old on CS that you totally "own" them would be normal. Saying the same thing to someone who's father or grandfather was a slave not be as appropriate.

      I wasn't specifically asking about your personal habits when I asked why not say poo vs shit, it was more of a "lets explore why social conventions make this uncommon".

      I suppose if I take a step back and look at the larger picture of the thread, profanity, offensiveness and community I come up with this: In MMO games, (or any community) it seems more and more that people are unwilling to communicate with their audience in mind, or with a total disregard for their audience. Players tend to expect the listener to accept their personal values, but show an unwillingness to show that same respect in return. In our conversation, I have no problem saying "shit" repeatedly, because I know(or at least strongly presume) that it doesn't offend you, and in the context of our conversation is unlikely to offend or irritate anyone who passes by. If I were having the same debate in a church group, I would phrase things differently, because I would want to show respect for my listeners.

      The argument over swearwords really muddies the topic the article tries to address. It's not just about swearing, its about respect and maturity (I'm not saying swearing is immature, but if I have to hear one more joke about chuck norris or one more 14 year old's fantasies about Jessica Alba...) Programmers can add filters for swear words, because those are easy, but how do you add a filter for "idiotic" or "generally rude" or "can't seem to type v0w3ls". I hate the suggestion (that I see often, not from you) to "Just turn on the filter, or ignore the rude people". It implies that requiring respect is irrational or unrealistic. Players shouldn't have to opt out of rudeness and disprespect, online gaming culture should include courtesy by default.

    54. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      if poo = shit then we wouldn't have two different words for it. Language is far more complex than that, and there is a great deal of context, implication, and meaning tied to words beyond their dictionary definitions.

      What I'm asking is why is it that the word shit, containing one syllable and four letters and meaning 'feces', is bad, while the word crap, containing one syllable and four letters and meaning 'feces', isn't. I'm not arguing that there should be no connotations. What I'm asking is: why the certain words which are 'bad' and not others which are roughly equivalent? Why isn't there a 'bad word' for snot? It's a bodily product. What about saliva? Why only two of the body's many excretions? Why is there a 'bad word' for sex but not fighting? Isn't fighting worse than sex? Where's the sense in it? That's what I'm asking.

    55. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      It's kind of silly, since adults who don't want to hear "f*ck" have to do some mental gymnastics NOT to insert it over the bleep. But the purpose where kids are concerned is clear: to avoid teaching them the word.

      Well, then it is completely and utterly useless. If that is really the purpose for it, then we're spending every minute and dollar needed to 'bleep' things in vain. Is there anyone over the age of 5 who's never heard a 'bad' word?

    56. Re:They are just words. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Literally, fuck means rape. So saying 'fuck you' to a person implies you want to, or want someone to sexually violate them against their will. Even removed from it's traditional, literal definition, the word portrays extreme disrespect and hostility. 'I want you to leave' is very different from 'fuck off' because of this. It is those connotations that make the word 'bad' because they are understood to be intentionally disrespectful. It's the verbal equivalent to spitting in someone's face when directed at someone.

    57. Re:They are just words. by slartibart · · Score: 1
      Huh, I'm pretty sure that is in fact the purpose, and I don't agree that it's totally useless.

      I personally could care less if there were curse words during prime time, but when I have kids, I'll probably be glad there aren't. The last think I want is my kid running around screaming "F*CK! F*CK! F*CK!"

      And I'm pretty sure there are plenty of kids, even in this day and age, over the age of 5 who have not yet been exposed to all these words. By 10, yeah, but not 5.

    58. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      If "1.1 = 1.0 for our purposes" then:

      1.0 = 1.1 = 1.2 = 1.3 = 1.4 = 1.5 = 1.6 = 1.7 = 1.8 = 1.9 = 2.0


      Not if we're rounding to the nearest whole number. Then 1.4 = 1 and 1.5 = 2.

      Societal norms in the 'associative baggage'.

      That isn't rational. I have no problem with certain phrases being considered crass. However, crassness does not equal unsuitability for T.V. What makes one crass synonym for a thing acceptable for T.V. while another is unacceptable? Don't cop out with 'societal norms'. I obviously know that they are societal norms, otherwise I wouldn't be able to question WHY they are societal norms.

      Of course, its more complex than that; 'society' isn't a homogeneous blob

      That's why I get so pissed off over the concept of 'bad words'.

      "Fuck off" is offensive precisely because its normal use in society at large is precisely to incite offense.

      This is (as I have been getting all day) a tautology. Bad because it's bad is NOT RATIONAL. If there's no rational reason, just come right out and admit it. But you won't, because then you'd feel silly for following the convention.

      A lack of sensitivity to this itself speaks volumes.

      If I had no sensitivity to it, how could I question the rationality of it?

      To spew profanity...

      Why is profanity profane? Still waiting for an answer on this one. Never going to get one that isn't a tautology.

      Some words are offensive because large groups within society attach offensive semantics to them.

      No shit, Sherlock. Why were the particular words chosen? Why does there seem to be only one 'swear' word for each group of offensive words? Why is only one synonym bad, and why that particular one? These are the questions that you didn't even try to address.

    59. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Assuming you're correct (although I have read MANY variations on where 'fuck' came from and what it supposedly originally meant), that's one down. 6 to go.

    60. Re:They are just words. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Why empower the words so much? So that we have a wider dynamic of expression? Perhaps there is a situation where you DO want to convey extreme disrespect to someone. The word fits that purpose. Take away the word, or take away the meaning, and you either lose the ability to convey that, or another word/phrase evolves to fill that role.
    61. Re:They are just words. by Canthros · · Score: 1

      Look, you're either intentionally thick or you're incapable of understanding this. You've already demonstrated the ability to use a dictionary, you can look up terms like profane and obscene on your own. I'm not going to waste time explaining in small words the sort of things that you ought to have figured out by now.

      You want a rational reason not to use those words? Isn't avoiding unnecessary offense rational enough? Or do you need to have the whole history of the language laid out for you to accept that some words are inappropriate for general use for reasons related to protocol that you, apparently, have never bothered to learn?

      Look, I'm a software engineer. I was being exaggeratedly careful in the previous post to make a point. You've already exhausted my patience. The rational reason, the simplest one, is that using those words causes some people offense and portrays oneself as an uneducated, uncouth bore. Your obsession with a deeper rationalisation mostly betrays a lack of imagination, and I really don't have time or inclination to speculate on the reasons that some behaviors are considered polite and some are not. Life is short, and God knows I've better things to do. Good day.

      --
      Canthros
    62. Re:They are just words. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      I hate the suggestion (that I see often, not from you) to "Just turn on the filter, or ignore the rude people". It implies that requiring respect is irrational or unrealistic. Players shouldn't have to opt out of rudeness and disprespect, online gaming culture should include courtesy by default.

      Exactly. And Penny Arcade was quite accurate on the subject. The anonymity of the internet, especially in virtual worlds where your character can be completely recreated as an entirely new identity, removes responsibility. It doesn't matter if I'm disrespectful, I can always change my handle/create a new avatar. With no persistent identity, people can absolve themselves of personal responsibility. Lack of persistent identity, and the accountability that comes with, is a primary issue.
    63. Re:They are just words. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Why is profanity profane? Still waiting for an answer on this one. Never going to get one that isn't a tautology We're not talking about logic here. We're talking about emotional responses to language. It's not logical, and don't expect it to be. People find it offensive. It doesn't really matter why. Because a majority of people find it offensive, it's considered an 'offensive' word.

      If I say the word 'sandwich' is offensive to me, it's not an offensive word. Why? Because noone agrees with me. However, if 50 million english speakers all decided 'sandwich' was offensive, you'd see a lot of menus change.

      Besides, context is everything. Looking at the word on it's own just isn't looking at the whole picture.
    64. Re:They are just words. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Yes, Just words. That is all. They carry no ability you don't give them. Or if they are backed in another manner such as contracts.

      A word can not hurt you if you don't let it, and they can't bring you joy if you don't let them.
      KNowing the difference is maturity.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    65. Re:They are just words. by loafula · · Score: 1

      To rely on swearing to convey your disrespect seems to me like a much more narrow dynamic of expression. Its like a last resort when you can't put into words what you're really trying to say.

      --
      FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
    66. Re:They are just words. by Zephyr14z · · Score: 1

      If you have to put profanity in every sentence, you're doing a lousy job of speaking it, and that annoys me. It's like watching someone drive a ferrari without knowing how to shift; it makes me wince.
      If you're literally filling every sentence with profanity, then I agree with you. However, an unwillingness to use it at all is like driving a ferrari and being unwilling to put it in top gear. Don't begrudge others their willingness to use all the words in our language.
    67. Re:They are just words. by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Ok... so lets see... you grok that some words offend some people. right?
      And that some words offend a lot more people than others, right?
      And that some words, if spoken to the general public, are likely offend a fair number of people, right?

      So, in light of all that, are we in agreement that you should avoid using those words and phrases if you don't intend to offend people? That's all that's being suggested. Suggesting that poo and shit are really the same thing if you round to the nearest whole number so people should just get over themselves for being irrational is ridiculous.

      Setting aside for a moment the "WHY", lets just deal with the FACT that poo and shit are different.

      That is all that's really at issue here.

      Why were the particular words chosen? Why does there seem to be only one 'swear' word for each group of offensive words? Why is only one synonym bad, and why that particular one? These are the questions that you didn't even try to address.

      So now we're talking about the "WHY".

      Assuming that we already agree 'shit' is differant than 'poo', and we already agree that reason people say 'shit' instead of 'poo' too deliberately invoke that difference.

      So why is Shit is more offensive than poo? because society has collectively agreed that this is the case.

      And that's a circular argument you say! But no. Not at all. That is the reason shit is more offensive than poo.

      The question you are really asking now though is: "So why did society choose shit to be offensive, and not poo". That's a different question entirely, and I agree "that's what society agreed on" is not an answer to that at all.

      So why "shit" and not "poo"? Is there a reason? In a word: yes. Is it rational? Depends on what you mean by rational? If by rational you mean that there should be some way of predicting in advance using logic which words will become offensive and which won't, of course not. There is nothing about the letter's 's' 'h' 'i' 't' that are magically offensive, and no way of 'predicting' that combining them will be.

      If by rational you mean that there is a reasonable explanation for it, then yes there is. Words have history. Throughout history few words are conceived of as offensive, they gain that status through their use. "Nigger" is a great example, because we can see the history... The word comes from 'negro' which itself was spanish for 'black', which itself comes from latin 'niger' for black. The word 'nigger' itself is merely 'negro' as pronounced by the American South applied to 'black people'. And even then it held no offense.

      Only much later did someone, god only knows who, deliberately invoke that American South pronunciation of negro to conjure the idea of a black person in a pejorative sense by using that pronunciation to connect it with slavery, uneducated, etc. And society grokked the connection, and understood what he was trying to say. And 'nigger' started picking up that negative imagery as that pejorative use was reinforced through additional use. Notably it was offensive in the North long before it was offensive in the South. Eventually it became an 'ultimate insult' because the people using it WANTED it to be a deadly insult, and the people who heard them say it - KNEW that was what the speaker wanted.

      Is that a rational explanation? I think so.

      Why does there seem to be only one 'swear' word for each group of offensive words?

      Theres no shortage of terms for 'vagina'.

      In cases where there is just one... evidently no ones managed or bothered to introduce another one that society really picked up on. Slang terms are invented and discarded continually... few of them ever reach full cultural awareness.

      Perhaps one of the reasons the 'established' ultimate words in a category are just that..."established"...once established any attempt to dethrone them by using a different word fails because despite what the speaker intends we hear it as 'falling short' of going all the way. Sort of l

    68. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I have to give you serious credit. This is a very good response. The only thing I might say to you is that for any societal convention the violation of which causes individuals to be fined or incarcerated there should be a rational explanation. I don't think that's too much to ask. Can we agree on this?

      As an aside, this thread is the first time I've ever actually hit the posting cap. Too bad 90% of it was responding to people without an iota of your insight.

    69. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      We're not talking about logic here. We're talking about emotional responses to language. It's not logical, and don't expect it to be.

      But people are fined and incarcerated for emotional responses! That is disgusting. Laws SHOULD be based on reason. And don't give me that 'the FCC is a regulatory body, not a law enforcement body' because that's just semantics. FCC regulations carry the force of law.

      Besides, context is everything. Looking at the word on it's own just isn't looking at the whole picture.

      See above.

    70. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Wow. You sure get overly affected by ridiculous things. My 'obsession' is idle curiosity. I have spare cycles and I think and type really fast. I am not ignorant of societal rules. Have I been cussing you out? Yet people are fined hundreds of thousands of dollars per year because of these things. Don't we have a responsibility to at least consider what we're doing before we go around taking people's money? Oh, I'm sorry. You win. You said "Good Day Sir" first. I should have thought of that.

    71. Re:They are just words. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I really wish I could give you a moderation that is +1 to all posts you make for a year.

      Well done.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    72. Re:They are just words. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      ummm, no.

      First off, you are using a mathmatics to draw out a logical conclusion in language.

      poo does not equal shit.

      Both get different response, therefore they're not the same.

      Of course, you probably think calling someone a 'Puss' is calling them a part of female anatomy, which is also wrong.

      There are no bad words, I agree. There are words which are inapropriete, mean, impolite, ill-suit, bad form, unbecoming, undue, malapropos, and tasteless, but no bad words.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    73. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      well, i seriously doubt that a child under 10 could properly use and understand any of the proscribed words, so I don't see that it's any different from them saying things like 'war' or 'amputee' or 'there's no god' or 'jesus christ' or anything else that could be socially awkward. We just spend so much damn money and fine people so much money over this that I don't think it's too much to ask that we at least examine the why.

    74. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I was making an overly broad generalization in the forlorn hope, vain as it has proved, that people would understand that it wasn't intended as an exact mathematical proof. It was SUPPOSED to be somthing to get people THINKING in a general fashion. Obviously, I failed in that. I should have realized that even in a thread about the vagaries of language, slashdotters wouldn't give any ground at all. Let me try to explain this: they are synonymous. Synonymous means 'about the same' just like 1.1 is about the same as 1.2 without actually being 1.2. Are you with me so far? I understand that there are situations where you wouldn't use a word even though it is a synonym of another word because of connotation. HOWEVER, generally speaking, synonyms are roughly equivalent because that is what synonym means.

    75. Re:They are just words. by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Plus I love the English language. If you have to put profanity in every sentence, you're doing a lousy job of speaking it, and that annoys me.

      Fucking spot on, man. I totally agree with your shit here. Peoples needs to get their assholes in order and speak rightly!

    76. Re:They are just words. by Angostura · · Score: 1

      So to be clear:

      You do not dispute that different words are appropriate for different situations. But you do dispute that some words are inappropriate in some situations.

    77. Re:They are just words. by Maserati · · Score: 1

      You still have yet to explain why only a few particular words are considered foul.

      Because that is their agreed-upon meaning in the language. After a language has been in use for centuries or millenia asking why certain words have the meaning they do is useless; they just do.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    78. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Not exactly. I appreciate that different words are appropriate for different situations. I dispute that some words are 'so bad' that they should be removed from the lexicon entirely. I also disapprove of banning/sanctioning people based specifically on word choice. Banning for being a jerk is fine, as long as there are guidelines. But if one person says 'you're crap' and doesn't get banned, but another person says 'you're shit' and does get banned, I have a problem with that.

    79. Re:They are just words. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I am not disputing the meaning. I'm disputing the idea that word choice can make a concept verboten. For example: You can say, "You're full of crap" on TV all day long with no repercussions. However, if you say, "You're full of shit" on TV, you will be fined. The meaning, in this context, is exactly the same. However, based upon the use of one synonym over another, you can be fined/sanctioned. That bothers me greatly. I don't expect to change society, but I also won't blindly support illogical societal conventions.

  8. obPA by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny
    1. Re:obPA by Suertreus · · Score: 2, Funny
    2. Re:obPA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://youtube.com/watch?v=IHJVolaC8pw

      watch the clip. It speaks for itself. People really do become fucktards.

  9. There is a solution to this problem by Control+Group · · Score: 1

    And it's the one that one of the people who commented on TFA proposed: do away with anonymity. Require the account holder's real name, address, and phone number to be publicly viewable. This would result in some real-world repercussions for the griefer, when those who had been griefed got torqued enough to go to the kid's house and beat him up. That happens a few times, and people will start being more careful.

    This is not a good idea, of course, but it would solve the problem.

    --

    Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    1. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah , good idea, so some nut job who you consistently beat in Halo/COD/Resistance will track you down and shoot you dead in your driveway. Any more bright ideas?

    2. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree that anonymity is the problem. It's lack of accountability and consequences.

      You have an identity, it's your character's name, or your chat nick, or whatever. Everyone will already know that Uberleetkid swears like a sailor and sexually assaults female (and sometimes male) characters with emotes, and they'll know this based on his in-game identity.

      But he still won't stop until he suffers consequences for it.

      Even if you knew that Uberleetkid was John Q. Smith who lived at 1234 Paved Street in Bumtown, Montana, you still couldn't do anything to him -- not even if you went there in person, as there are no laws against what he's doing in the game (yet?).

      Only when there are rules against actions like that in the game, AND those rules are efficiently enforced (a huge problem in large online worlds), will he even think about behaving. Even then, he'll do what most people do even in real life: he'll still misbehave as long as he thinks he won't get caught.

    3. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real world isn't a computer game - the fact that something is against the rules won't stop people doing it.

    4. Re:There is a solution to this problem by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      But if you had an auto-ban feature on WoW where if you get 10 ban requests from ten different people in a small enough amount of time you'll automatically get kicked. You can choose to e appeal the decision and have it reviewed by three employees of blizzard or three good DMs. Some of the bans will get appealed randomly whether asked to or not. If it was a misunderstanding, reinstate the person and warn the people who voted to ban the character that they should be more careful next time. If it was a deliberate abuse of the system, ban the ten people instead.

      If that doesn't work, but it's implemented, maybe get a deposit out of people that won't be returned if they get banned for life.

    5. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      This is very stupid.
      Internet anonymity is a core principle which enables online communities.
      WHat we need is system of reputation:
      e.g. if you get ignored by 5 players,you get -5 score.if by 10 ,-10 etc that way player can judge people by their previcious interactions.
      It needs to be more abuse-proof then simply counting ignores.
      Auto-ban filters and auto-ignore filters,would be bettter in real-time.
      Say something stupid,and you're banned/ignored before the message even reaches user screen.

    6. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Control+Group · · Score: 1
      Yes, it is very stupid. To quote myself:

      This is not a good idea, of course, but it would solve the problem.


      If you're playing along at home, that's the last line of the post.
      --

      Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    7. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Control+Group · · Score: 1

      Even if you knew that Uberleetkid was John Q. Smith who lived at 1234 Paved Street in Bumtown, Montana, you still couldn't do anything to him -- not even if you went there in person, as there are no laws against what he's doing in the game (yet?).

      That there is nothing you can legally do to him does not mean there is nothing you can do to him. This is among the reasons I said it was a bad idea. But vigilanteism can be an effective deterrent; I suspect it wouldn't take too many examples of people getting the crap kicked out of them in real life for being jackasses in game before things would start to improve.

      Of course, now you've just traded verbal abuse in game for physical battery in the real world, which isn't what I'd call a quality solution. But it would work.

      The problem, of course, is anonymity. It's no secret that the more anonymous people are - or at least, the more anonymous people feel - the less likely they are to control their uncivil urges. Driving is a perfect example of this: if your experience is anything like mine, you see people do things with their cars every day that you simply do not see people doing to each other when there's face-to-face interaction.

      The internet makes people feel perfectly anonymous (they're wrong about this, but that doesn't matter), which, for a significant percentage of people, means that they've got license to do anything they want.

      Stereotyping or not, this is a problem that's much more prevalent in the early-to-mid teens boy than other demographics. The internet is kind of like the island in Lord Of the Flies, just with less dying.
      --

      Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    8. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Control+Group · · Score: 1

      You know, I do have one more bright idea: you should try reading the post before sounding off. Specifically the last bit, where I say that it's not a good idea.

      On the other hand, you make an excellent example of the problem that needs to be solved. Easy to be a pissant when you're anonymous, isn't it?

      --

      Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    9. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Tofystedeth · · Score: 1

      This is one of the reason's I use this nick almost everywhere on the internet (that and the fact it is pretty much guaranteed unique. Nobody else is stupid enough to want it for themselves.) If I say something dumb here on /., as I have been known to, then if someone sees me somewhere else, they might remember that and change their opinion of me. It's for this reason that in the last few months I've canceled as many posts on forums as I've submitted. I think to myself, "Is this comment worthwhile? Am I saying anything that needs saying or hasn't yet been said? If this is misinterpreted I'm going to look like a moron everywhere."

      Perhaps what we need is not publicly viewable personal info, but a single internet identity privately linked to your real world one. Bad ratings anywhere are reflected everywhere. If you're a moron, or a hate-monger, or a troll, everyone knows it, and more and more you are ignored/auto-filtered before you even open your mouth. The only way to improve your rating, is to improve your behavior. That or prove to some kind of governing authority that you are the victim of e-slander or something.

      --
      "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deeply or not at all."
    10. Re:There is a solution to this problem by rlp · · Score: 1

      Require the account holder's real name, address, and phone number to be publicly viewable

      There's a problem with that:

      1) Idiot A mouths off to Idiot B on-line
      2) Idiot B looks up the real name and address of Idiot A.
      3) Idiot B drives to Idiot A's house and shoots him.
      4) Jack Thompson uses the shooting to get all video games banned
      5) Idiot C unable to play video games anymore becomes a terrorist and nukes a major city.

      So no, we REALLY don't want to get rid of anonymity. :~)

      --
      [Insert pithy quote here]
    11. Re:There is a solution to this problem by orclevegam · · Score: 2, Funny

      1) Idiot A mouths off to Idiot B on-line
      2) Idiot B looks up the real name and address of Idiot A.
      3) Idiot B drives to Idiot A's house and shoots him.
      4) Jack Thompson threatens to ban all video games
      5) Idiot C drives to Thompsons house and shoots him.
      6) ???
      7) Profit!

      And no, before someone says it I do not condone the shooting of Jack Thompson...
      Shooting would be too good for him. He should be disbarred and die a lonely broken man, although considering his mental state (I don't believe for a minute he's actually sane, whether he passed a psych test or not) he'd probably just retreat into Thompson land and sit gibbering in a corner... actually, that might explain a few things.
      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    12. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Control+Group · · Score: 1

      ...which sums up why I closed the post with "this is not a good idea".

      However: how often do you see this happen in real life? It's certainly not never, but there really aren't all that many instances of people getting torqued enough to track down the guy who cut them off in traffic and shoot him.

      --

      Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    13. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem, of course, is anonymity. It's no secret that the more anonymous people are - or at least, the more anonymous people feel - the less likely they are to control their uncivil urges.

      Shut up you stupid tard!

      lol, I kid, I kid.

    14. Re:There is a solution to this problem by rlp · · Score: 1

      You realize that writing the name 'Jack Thompson' has similar effects to saying the name 'Hastur'.

      --
      [Insert pithy quote here]
    15. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Mattintosh · · Score: 1

      And hopefully less pig-rape.

      Oh, and sucks to your ass-mar.

    16. Re:There is a solution to this problem by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      I know you did not just compare Thompson to one of the great old ones.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    17. Re:There is a solution to this problem by MyIS · · Score: 1

      Not sure if anyone else posted this, but I think there is a much more beautiful and elegant solution. Blizzard - listen up.

      Simply have an option of sending all the chat logs produced by a particular account to a "parent/guardian contact" for that account. Kids swear online because they think that there is no repercussion for it, no oversight. This would introduce that oversight back. Just like consoles and satellite boxes have a "parental password", this would be also set up similarly - it is the parent that ultimately has to pay for the account anyway.

      Of course, the kid would have to be aware that the chats are logged and "audited" - that's really the point of it anyway. It's just introducing the *awareness* of adult supervision - noone would actively scour through thousands of lines of "roflmao's" anyway. Also, only the public channel messages from the account should be monitored; let private messages be private, still. After all, the nuisance only comes when kids are unsupervised in "common areas"; leaving an avenue for private communication would certainly let the young'un feel some respect and responsibility.

      --
      http://zero-to-enterprise.blogspot.com/
    18. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Omestes · · Score: 1

      I have pondered this. It is a well known social psychological fact that anonymity loosens peoples inhibitions, especially towards the more vile acts of humanity. Removing anonymity would "re-humanize" people on the internet, and make the ultimately culpable for their actions. But, of course, you are correct, it is not a wise idea, since in a few (very few) cases it allows people to say important things that they would not be allowed to say in society.

      There is a way around this, though. I have been using the handle "Omestes" for 10 years or so, and thus feel connected to this persona, it has a reputation, and people have expectations for it, just like my real life identity. This keep the anonyminity factor in check, for the most part, since it would be damaging, and out of character for me posting under this persona to run about and call people "fag" for no reason. If I did this consistently, though, I also would grow a reputation, a negative one, and people would avoid it. It would lose trust.

      Thus I think we need persistent "handles". On WoW, for example, have each character tied to the actual account, and thus actions would be tied to one identity, and all bans/ignores/complaints would reflect on this one account. Sort of like how the new X-Box live keeps individual scores/actions down to one account, regardless of the game, or in-game persona. These super-persona's should be rated by the amount of grief they are attributed. There should be a way to filter them by this (much like a gradiated version of Karma), and when it goes low enough offer various flavors of ban. Most of all make this public. Have public lists of who has the best/worst civil rankings.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    19. Re:There is a solution to this problem by harl · · Score: 1

      This is a horrible idea. Guilds routinely have more than 10 people.

      Hey guys this guy grabbed my ore spawn. Banned.
      Hey guys this guy is hunting in my area. Banned.
      Hey guys this guy is bidding against me in the auction hall. Banned.
      Hey guys this guy beat me in a duel. Banned.
      Hey guys I'm bored and reading off names at random. Banned.
      Hey guys this guy likes a sports team I hate. Banned.
      Hey guys this guy won the roll on an item I wanted. Banned.

      10 people could empty a server before a single appeal could be proccessed. The appeals process would be a crushing burden on the staff. It's impossible to define deliberate abuse.

      You can never give a player the ability to deny access of another player to the game. Any such feature will be used violently and will allways generate more trouble than it was ever meant to solve.

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    20. Re:There is a solution to this problem by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Blizzard logs everything that happens, they could pull all the information from just before the person was banned and see if the reasons they were banned were legitimate. The review would take easily less than an hour per person if set up correctly and as soon as a few guilds lost 20 or 30 guys to abusing the banning system, other guilds would take notice and crack down. Besides, the people who legitimately enjoy the game and worked within the system like they should would easily outweigh those who abused it.

    21. Re:There is a solution to this problem by harl · · Score: 1

      Bullshit on your bullshit.

      If it's so good why has it never been implimented? Some variation of this has been suggested for every MMPOG every made. They've all been shot down because it's highly abusable.

      If blizzard logs everything then why can't they simply automate the banning process and leave the 10 players out of it? Because the whole concept revolves around something that is subjective. One person's valid play style is another person's harassment. If it violates the EULA there's already a handy way to deal with it.

      The appeal process you mention is asking Blizzard to arbitrate any dispute between players. Then you're telling me that won't be a burden on their staff.

      All it takes is one group to cancel their account and go rogue. Hundreds are banned before Blizzard can react. I'm sure those people will be ok with being locked out of their accounts while they wait for the problem to be solved.

      Hell you'd get guilds who would buy throwaway accounts just to fuck with other guilds.

      It was a stupid idea 10 years ago. It's a stupid idea now. It will be a stupid idea 10 years from now.

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    22. Re:There is a solution to this problem by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      Every one of those problems could be worked around without Blizzard having to spend a significant portion of resources to it, be it by limiting the number of bans that someone can hand out to making it so that a person has to be a certain level before they can ban. Is it worth it to Blizzard? No. Is it entirely feasible without Blizzard having to put more than five people per server on the problem? Yes. Right after it was implemented there would be a lot of activity that required attention as people learned what is and is not allowed in the EULA and as people get banned for abuse of the system, but after a few months everything would stabilize and it wouldn't take much effort.

    23. Re:There is a solution to this problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anon for obvious reasons.

      Our average players are fucking idiots. Yeah maybe I'm just jaded but giving this much power to players would make my life hell. What it boils down to for me is players pay us. Players have a contract with us. We decide who plays and who doesn't. You don't. It's griefable. Would you be ok with a random group of players removing you from the game, even temporarily? You're going to answer yes, and likely talk about how it would get sorted out and they would be banned, but if it happened to you you'd be screaming bloody fucking murder and using up more of my resources than if you just ignored them. Do you know how many petitions we get for reimbursement when we're down for an hour and how much time that takes up?

    24. Re:There is a solution to this problem by harl · · Score: 1
      You said it your self.

      Is it worth it to Blizzard? No. Was, is and will be a bad idea.
      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    25. Re:There is a solution to this problem by devnull17 · · Score: 1

      1% of parents might use that, and that's an optimistic figure. Besides, there are loads of obnoxious jackasses who are (physically) older than 18. And how many parents do you know that would be savvy enough to see through their children's attempts to circumvent the system?

  10. Ignoreing them doesnt solve the issue really. by Kaffien · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Back in the day, and still up until now even on this board. We have moderators. They should have chat moderators in games such as wow. Repeat offenders should be banned from chat rather than the whole game. Someone starts lipping off incoherently, they get kicked and if they keep it up banned until further notice. Being banned from general and shout etc would be a server pain. Theres ways around but still ... it might be a start.

    1. Re:Ignoreing them doesnt solve the issue really. by Tyrion+Moath · · Score: 1

      They do. Everybody is a moderator in WoW. All you have to do is click a couple buttons, type a short description of what's going on, and wait. That person will get banned for a couple days, and problem solved. I think theres a perma ban after 3rd offense. Alternatively, you could try and be constructive to the person: tell them that their language is offensive to you, and that you would appreciate it if they would stop. They'll probably call you some names, but then thats just more reason to have them banned.

    2. Re:Ignoreing them doesnt solve the issue really. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Just let the players mod people , and set you threshhold accordingly.

      You get 1 mod point a day, and they can't be saved.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Ignoreing them doesnt solve the issue really. by devnull17 · · Score: 1

      There are other considerations.

      For instance, I'm a member of a decent raiding guild on my server. We've had a few server firsts, but are generally neck-and-neck with a few other guilds. While the prestige of being the first to beat content and the phat lewtz we receive are nice, simply winning subjects you to grief from other players.

      Take our guild leader, for example. He's a good enough guy. He enforces humility to the greatest extent possible--our players don't go around linking their drops in trade chat, or talking trash, or stirring up drama. But if you were to survey all the players on our server, his name would be in the top 5 most disliked, guaranteed. Not because it's deserved, but because that's just how it is--if you turn down someone's application, they hate you. If you don't reply to their seventh PM asking if they can join your SSC raid (this happens all the time, believe it or not), they hate you. If you beat a rival guild to a world boss, they all hate you. Anyway, if that moderation system were implemented, he'd be at the lowest possible score within 24 hours, and most of his ratings would come from people who had never actually talked to him.

      Remember the "Warn" feature on AOL Instant Messenger? The idea was that anyone could punish anyone else for anything, and restrict their target's ability to send messages temporarily. I never saw it used for anything other than griefing, and the feature was eventually removed. Moderation works on Slashdot, but I'd argue that that's only because most of /.'s users are reasonably intelligent, and care about the site. Such a system wouldn't work in most places.

  11. Maybe I'm just drunk... by Fizzl · · Score: 1

    ...But what the hell is this article about? One more iota of randomness and the summary could be used as an entropy bucket for a PRNG.

    1. Re:Maybe I'm just drunk... by Floritard · · Score: 1

      Drunk by 12:25pm on a weekday? Want a new job as my personal hero?

  12. Thunder Bluff? by wbren · · Score: 4, Funny

    But Thunder Bluff is full of easy-going Tauren. I mean, I've had people moo at me rudely, but I wouldn't call them "racist junk-monkeys". I'm sick of people stereotyping Tauren! First it's "Tauren are stupid cows" and "Tauren aren't allowed in my house because they'll break the china". Now it's "Tauren are racists". When will it all end...

    --
    -William Brendel
    1. Re:Thunder Bluff? by vjmurphy · · Score: 4, Funny

      I hear that Geico's next commercials will feature a new tag line "So easy, even a Tauren can do it."

      --
      Vincent J. Murphy
      Spandex Justice
    2. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back when I was playing, Barrens General was mostly talking about Chuck Norris. And people complaining about the Chuck Norris chat (Which I generally find the more annoying part). I don't remember any racist comments, but there was the term "gay" thrown around as a general insult sometimes.

    3. Re:Thunder Bluff? by cedricfox · · Score: 1

      ...Need More Rage.

      --
      Did you ever get the feeling the story is too damn long and in the present tense?
    4. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      They just see the hot Tauren as pieces of meat anyway.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    5. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      What is thunder bluff? I RTFA, but didn't see anything saying what it is. I'm guessing it's some sort of MMO?

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    6. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I dunno, that sounds like a bunch of bull shit to me.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    7. Re:Thunder Bluff? by notamisfit · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's the capital city for the Tauren (giant man-cows) in World of Warcraft.

      --
      Jesus is coming -- look busy!
    8. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm proud to say that I have no frigg'n idea what you are talking about.

    9. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OMG wher is mankirks wife? I ben looking for hours!

    10. Re:Thunder Bluff? by AntiNazi · · Score: 1

      "Capital" city in World of Warcraft, populated primarily by the Tauren race.

    11. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Alsee · · Score: 1

      I hear Geico originally considered "So easy an AOL'r can do it" as the theme for that commercial...
      but that their legal department nixed it because of potential conflict with the advertising fraud laws.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    12. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you missed the memoo.

    13. Re:Thunder Bluff? by tygt · · Score: 1
      Hear hear.

      I may be but an uncouth Orc, but I know quality when I see it ("I will crush and destroy and...ooo...shiny..."), and TB's quality. Even local chat isn't horrible (though I rarely subscribe, only when trying hard to sell), and it's just such a nice place...

      And, of course, most of my friends are T's!

    14. Re:Thunder Bluff? by The+Slashdot+Guy · · Score: 1

      It's simple jealousy. The look, the dance, the jokes, Tauren have it all. If Tauren could be rogues, there would be no reason to roll any other race. I don't know why Blizzard overlooked this, as Tauren are naturally stealthy.

    15. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Miniluv · · Score: 1

      Dude...warstomp.

    16. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Roll a druid, spec feral. You don't get to pick locks or stunlock, but you do get to sneak up on poor unsuspecting Allies. Pounce, Mangle, Rip, Shred, RIP.

    17. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      Thanks! I did not know that. All I play is Battlefield2/2142.

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    18. Re:Thunder Bluff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Y'know Taurens are born hunters. You ever seen a tauren catch a salmon out of the stream? It really is quite exciting.... You ever seen a tauren stalking a python? Course you haven't. Thats because taurens are so adept at blending into their surroundings.

    19. Re:Thunder Bluff? by andi75 · · Score: 1

      Parent is a troll, but I'll bite.

      - Thunderbluff is built on a big pile of kodo dung. The smell is enough to drive you insane,
      - The rope walks connecting the bluffs are in terrible condition and NOT SAVE TO WALK ON. Don't use them.
      - For some reason, the cows deny any mages below lvl 50 to make a portal to they're city. Neither Orgrimmar nor Undercity have that restrictions. Now if that's not racist I don't know...
      - The place doesn't even have a zeppelin point. How much more backwater can you get?

    20. Re:Thunder Bluff? by devnull17 · · Score: 1

      It's like any other backwater town: it's only nice because no one is there.

    21. Re:Thunder Bluff? by joncraft · · Score: 1

      Mooooo!

  13. Maybe... just maybe... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the video game industry wasn't an extended boys locker room where everything goes because there's no parents or teachers around? I worked for six years in the video game industry where such childish behavior was the norm. The supervisors called each other "douche bags". A woman lead tester was fired for calling a tester an "a**hole" for screwing off on her project, never mind that male testers routinely called each other "hos" and "bitches". Maybe it's time for the video game industry to clean up its act.

    1. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by moderatorrater · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or maybe, just maybe, that woman lead tester was fired because she was assaulting the person she called an "a**hole" whereas the people calling each other hos and bitches were joking with each other. It's the difference between arresting someone for trying to beat someone into submission and arresting a few guys who are wrestling with each other for fun.

    2. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the professional companies that I worked in, you could get fired for either remark. It really comes down to whether you're a professional or not, how you treat people and how you want people to treat you. Professionalism is sorely lacking in the video game industry.

    3. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      I agree that either comment deserves reprimand and that there's a lot to be said for professionalism. However, the market for video games is dominated by games that lack professionalism is their feel and are often juvenile or appeal to baser instincts. For a game like this to be developed, a highly unprofessional environment could be seen to be conducive to the end product.

    4. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Professionalism is sorely lacking in the video game industry.
      I can just see it now...

      Manager: Thanks for making to our weekly meeting. Can I get a status report from the various groups?
      Accounting: Sure, everything is looking good on our end. We're under budget and sales projections are better than expected.
      Software: We've been cleaning up a few bugs in the rendering engine and we found a security leak in the networking code, but we have that under control and are on track to release at the end of the month.
      Game Design: We've improved our blood-spatter algorithm, and Jason has made some dramatic changes to our texture modeling. The track marks on the hooker's arms are remarkably realistic. We're running into some issues for the Hot Coffee quest, though. Marketing is saying we'll have to pull the money-shot if we want to keep a Mature rating. I'm working with them to get some kind of compromise.
    5. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by vimh42 · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's a game industry issue but rather a broader social one.

    6. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think the real problem is that online games are almost exclusively about aggression. In almost all online games, the primary way you interact with the game world is a weapon. Even when you're in a party you're sometimes competing with your own party members. Until we have games that are founded on cooperation instead of competition, where your primary tools are something other than guns and swords, players of online games are going to be aggressive toward each other.

      It's the nature of the games themselves, which is of course a side effect of the people who work in the game industry, but also a cause. It's a vicious cycle. However, there is hope on the horizon, and it comes from the (unlikely) direction of Valve software and Team Fortress 2. Have you seen the latest trailer for Team Fortress 2? The facial animation software is nothing short of incredible. This is a key tool that has been missing from games for years. If it can be merged with a procedural animation system, Valve will have finally brought down the barriers to creating movie-quality character development and plots in games.

      Team Fortress won't have a movie-worthy in-game plot, to be sure, but the personality and above all *humor* infused into Valve's characters is already a welcome change from typical FPS fare. OTOH, something like Portal could be a breakthrough game.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    7. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      The problem is not video games, the problem is the Internet. Go to messageboards and you'll find the exact same behavior there, especially on forums with lax rules. One popular forum that prides itself in being a mature and intelligent place is full of users who resolve most arguments with "well go suck dick you faggot," and it's perfectly acceptable. In WoW you have a much higher chance of getting into trouble by saying things like that in public.

    8. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      If it can be merged with a procedural animation system ...
      And therein lies the problem. The days where *your* character can be seen reacting to *your* input with that level of detail and accuracy to *your* intended appearance are a very long way off.
      Until then, it's just filler. You may as well watch Shrek.
    9. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by supabeast! · · Score: 1

      I think the real problem is that online games are almost exclusively about aggression. I used to spend a lot of time playing fighting games online and I was surprised that they players almost never insult each other--or speak at all, for that matter. One player was known for spewing garbage, but was essentially a pariah. And I've seen a tremendous amount of violent, racist, homophobic, etc. speach online in games that were only mildly violent, as well as in chat and forum settings that feature NO violence. So I really don't see any connection between violence in the games and players acting like idiots. To me the online gaming world is just a place where teenage guys, and men who act like them, spew whatever crap comes into their heads because the service providers don't usually mind, and anyone who doesn't like it just goes somewhere else.
    10. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 1

      Well, up until now just rendering the realistic facial expressions on an in-game model in real time was out of reach. Until now, you couldn't even make a decent game version of Shrek. So it's a big step. Sure, any expressions lip-synced with dialog still need to be hand-animated, but the dialogue itself needs to be pre-recorded as well anyway for the foreseeable future. The days of generated dialogue certainly are a long way off. But that's not what I meant when I said "procedural animation system", I was talking more about basic things like convincing eye and head movements and walking with proper weight transfer and without feet sliding across the floor, which no game has yet gotten completely right. (Walking and especially turning animations are my pet peeve; we ought to be able to do better than linear interpolation between keyframes. We spend so much time making the still screenshots look pretty and then use the same old animation systems that make people walk like retarded robots.)

      Just having characters show convincing surprise, fear, and happiness at appropriate times is a huge step forward. As an example, imagine in Halo that after a harrowing fight, one marine breaks down crying over a fallen comrade. That's something that just wouldn't work at all with the generic stoic expression they all share now. A scene like that could add a lot of emotional depth, even if it was completely pre-scripted and randomly-triggered just like the little random quips that they currently make after combat. If you go crazy and start killing your fellow marines, you should see the surprise, fear, and hatred on their faces instead of just hearing it in their voice lines. It would go a long way toward making them seem actually human. It might even make you reluctant to do something crazy like start killing them, and make you feel obligated to protect them. That kind of emotional involvement is something games need.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    11. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by Toad-san · · Score: 1

      [quote]think the real problem is that online games are almost exclusively about aggression. In almost all online games, the primary way you interact with the game world is a weapon. Even when you're in a party you're sometimes competing with your own party members. Until we have games that are founded on cooperation instead of competition, where your primary tools are something other than guns and swords, players of online games are going to be aggressive toward each other.[/quote]

      Not necessarily always true. I refuse to play on WoW PVP servers, because it IS more like you describe. No problem: I just don't go there.

      Sure, my character carries a sword or gun. But he doesn't duel, he doesn't PVP, he doesn't go to battlefields; it's just not his thing. He tends to help others (even the other side) doesn't expect (but appreciates) help from others, solos almost everything.

      He experiences very little aggression, enjoys his questing and exploring, and generally has a good time.

      Add-ons help. NoDuel is one: a polite (automatic) rejection of the first thick-neck chest-butting juvenile challenge, and they get ruder from there. In the end the jerk is ignored. Works for me.

      He doesn't go nuts over role playing (although my characters frequent RP servers exclusively), but he appreciates people staying halfway in character. If they don't .. he just leaves.

      So what's the problem again? No one can be aggressive against my characters; the worst they can do is maybe cheat me out of some targets. And I have LOTS of characters on several servers; it's very very simple to simply ignore the jerks, or just move on.

      Show a little flexibility, eh?

    12. Re:Maybe... just maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work in a game company and we have *exactly* those discussions in a very serious manner.

  14. Play more civilized games by grapeape · · Score: 3, Informative

    Try Settlers of Catan or Uno on Live, i guess they are too boring for the teeners every game I have played so far has been civil and even pleasant.

    It would be nice to play a game against my nephew (the only person I know with an unhacked 360) without having to worry about colorful metaphors. Yes I know its nothing he hasnt heard before and its probably more distubing to me than him, but for grown-ups live is almost unusable for 90% of the games out there.

    While I hate censorship, I do wish Xbox Live had some sort of rating system for games with a reporting structure for violators. I think it would work, they could still allow free-for-all matchups that let the explicatives fly, just allow an easy way to designate gamers that dont want to hear it. Maybe an icon on the gamertag? It just looks like there should be some way to do it that allows freedom for both people who want to hear 12 year olds cuss and those that dont.

    1. Re:Play more civilized games by x-caiver · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uno on Live is a more civilized game? More mature maybe, but more civilized no. As one of the first camera-enabled Live games, and a slower paced (compared to an FPS) game it quickly became a pool of nudity. And unfortunately not the "hot grits" kind, but the "dude, wtf!??!" kind.

    2. Re:Play more civilized games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I always thought age-separated servers would help a lot in this department.

      Try playing an online game after midnight on a school night (Preferably one that is not too international). You'll notice right away that there is a lot less name-calling and general assholeness.

      Personally I'd pay to play on 21-and-up servers. No, I don't mean with adult content, just with other adults.

      If you want to do a civil MMORPG right now try Puzzle Pirates. Their enforced pirate-talk is a bit annoying, but other than that the environment and general attitude of the people is very very nice

    3. Re:Play more civilized games by Mark+Programmer · · Score: 1

      I'm actually pretty happy with the system XBox Live already has built-in for reporting and denoting people who have various levels of tolerance of bad behavior. The four 'gated communities' and the "Prefer / avoid" mechanism have appeared to work well for me. Halo 3 will probably be one of the first games I've played with a big enough immature userbase to really test the system: If I stop hearing offensive language after a couple weeks playing it, I'll consider it a success.

      --

      Take care,
      Mark

      There is a solution...

    4. Re:Play more civilized games by Tofystedeth · · Score: 1

      You can turn off the piratization filter. It has no filtering, blanking out, and comicifying. Besides, sometimes its fun to try and see if you can come up with dirty words it won't piratify. They get some pretty creative curses in em.

      --
      "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deeply or not at all."
    5. Re:Play more civilized games by Tofystedeth · · Score: 1

      Also, to the best of my knowledge, the only word that it simply does not allow is rape.

      --
      "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deeply or not at all."
    6. Re:Play more civilized games by turbopunk · · Score: 1

      This is not the case. About a month ago, i decided i wanted to finally unlock the acheivement on Uno for winning 10 Live matches. The experience was less then desirable . . .

      It have reached a point where i don't play games online unless i know you personally. Furthermore, i only do that when playing in the same room is not an option ( Co-op on Gears of War, for example. ) The reason is quick simple. If i can't smack the ever living @$%^@ out of them for being retarded, then they're going to be retarded.

      i have NEVER found an exception for that rule.

    7. Re:Play more civilized games by zzottt · · Score: 0

      my wife has stopped play Uno via XBL because of the awful stuff that happens. The thing that sent her over the edge was some jerk masterbating into his webcam....

    8. Re:Play more civilized games by StaticEngine · · Score: 1

      What I've found with Live is to not be in the Underground community. As soon as I switched to one of the family communities, I found a lot less swearing and offensive trash talk.

      What's sad is that I used to do networking and multiplayer development for games, but now, this is the section of code I'm least interested in because I know it will just enable behavior that irritates me. I rarely even play online PC games anymore.

    9. Re:Play more civilized games by MWoody · · Score: 1

      Whoah, what game are you playing? My second multiplayer game on Live I found myself up against 3 moronic young men who did nothing but swear constantly (I swear like a sailor myself, but for fuck's sake, there's a LIMIT) and laugh at each and every decision or trade I attempted in the game until I just had to quit. I haven't been back; it turns out a large part of what I enjoyed about Catan when I played it in college was playing it with friends or, at least, people I could expect to be civil.

  15. Thunder Bluff? by DurendalMac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think you mean Barrens General.

  16. Ban cursing by Jaeph · · Score: 1

    Please understand that I curse all the time in real-life, play on PvP servers without problem (e.g. shadowbane), and so on.

    That said, they really should ban people who curse in public chat (no, guild chat is not "public"). Someone who gets banned a few times for cursing ends up with a perma-ban.

    Again, I curse in real-life. But I see no positive reason to allow cursing in general chat channels.

    -Jeff

    --
    Please learn the difference between a dissenting opinion and a troll before you moderate.
    1. Re:Ban cursing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Please understand that I curse all the time in real-life..." ...me too, and I know that the typical 9-year-old knows some pretty impressive swear words as well. Swearing is just used for casual emphasis in many areas of society - any attempt to enforce the rules of one area on another is foolish, futile, and intolerant.

  17. Barren's Chat by spocksbrain · · Score: 1

    Just leave gerneral chat when riding through the barrens, problem fixed.

  18. Not an Issue for Me...... by Teratoma86 · · Score: 1
    Interesting article (yes, I read it :P). However, I guess I am one of those unheard of online players that finds the issues she discusses few and far between. I use my Ignore Players to keep the shrilling down but am usually so focused on the tasks at hand that I don't pay attention to the childish behavior.

    I like the idea of online gaming being the "Wild West". It is one of the few frontiers left and I, for one, don't want it changed.

    --
    A Slashdot thread without a flawed analogy is like a frozen fishstick without a train conductor. - Odin's Raven
    1. Re:Not an Issue for Me...... by Knara · · Score: 1

      I tend to agree, personally. One of the same reasons why I still use EFNet.

    2. Re:Not an Issue for Me...... by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      I also enjoy the freedom that the internet gives me. While sometimes I don't like what's going on, I find that I can just ignore it (no pun intended) or laugh at it. Maybe I'm just weird like this, but someone being stupid and offensive is more funny to me than anything and, at least for me, it's kind of rare to have people be rude to me without provocation.

  19. As an occasional WoW player by palladiate · · Score: 1

    I must say, I was disappointed. I hate running around Thunder Bluff trying to find anything, and I'd love to see it cleaned up. And I've only played Tauren.

    Seriously though, I play on a RP server, just so I don't have to deal with idiotic crap. Sure, we get plenty of dumb drama that keeps my playtime to less than 8 hours a month anymore. I do wonder, if the novelty of race-baiting and idiocy would be better than the age-old drudgery of dealing with tiny little egos crying to me about other tiny little egos crying to me. Word of advice, don't ever run a massive guild, don't ever sit on a playtest team, don't ever be friends with a successful and popular guild leader. If you do, you aren't playing a game any longer.

  20. Lack of Accountability by JoeD · · Score: 5, Informative

    The problem is a lack of real-world accountability.

    If someone were to act in real life the way some of those idiots act online, they'd get punched in the face pretty quickly. Unfortunately, there's no way to punch someone in the face over the net.

    1. Re:Lack of Accountability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet.

    2. Re:Lack of Accountability by Wyrd01 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, there's no way to punch someone in the face over the net.
      If you're talking about a game then the only way to "punch them in the face" is to win over them, in whatever the game you're playing is.

      Nothing will tick them off more than being "pnwed" by some "n00b". Once you've made them your whipping boy in the game there isn't much more they can really "say" and they'll log off in a frustrated huff.
    3. Re:Lack of Accountability by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      How about implementing virtual face-punching? Or, as they are better known around these parts, mod points

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    4. Re:Lack of Accountability by noidentity · · Score: 1

      "Unfortunately, there's no way to punch someone in the face over the net."
      Wait, I thought those online games were full of violence. I've heard people get raped and even murdered in them. At least people have suggested laws against that, so someone must getting hurt.

    5. Re:Lack of Accountability by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      No, they'll just report you for "hacking".

    6. Re:Lack of Accountability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? In the real world, you punch someone that says something you do not like. That sounds like a formula for landing yourself in jail. What happened to turning around and walking away? That is all the power you need and it works online too.

    7. Re:Lack of Accountability by Travoltus · · Score: 1

      If you run into a place where MMoRPG-level un-civil behavior is rampant in a population as big as WoW and the like, you better believe the lack of civility is factored in when someone gets punched out.

      Look up provocation sometime.

      --
      --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
    8. Re:Lack of Accountability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my experience, far from it.
      People are even ruder in real life, much more so, just through other means. In games it just so happens that every action has to be done in plain sight, or flat out explained in text... so it becomes a bit clearer.

      That goes back to what I consider to be the core problem, as well.
      Normal people.

      Remember M59? If you ever played it, the community there.
      The community of all the old games, when geeks were more or less geeks; things were different because the crowd was different.
      Had little to do with age, or any other factor - other than the niche factor.
      Now geeks aren't geeks. While it'll be made fun of, still, to play an mmorpg; normal people do it.
      Normal, blasphemously ungeeky people, are the disease to our communities.

      There's no cure for it, but it's amusing how opposite it is - in my eyes - to what people say it is (lack of real world consequence); when it's exactly the increase of real world mentalities and 'normality', that is creating insideous mass of new-gen players most more accustomed geeks are looking at in disgust.

    9. Re:Lack of Accountability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, there's no way to punch someone in the face over the net.

      Yes there is. But you get in far less trouble for punching somebody in the face for real.

    10. Re:Lack of Accountability by jbenwell · · Score: 1

      There are USB-controlled missile launchers. A boxing glove on a spring doesn't sound too difficult. You can't play if you don't have one.

    11. Re:Lack of Accountability by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      I knew violence wasn't the answer, I deliberately misunderstood the question.

  21. This Article Is Gay... by morari · · Score: 1

    [Note: Ironic Sarcasm?]

    --
    "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    1. Re:This Article Is Gay... by charlesbakerharris · · Score: 1

      Note: if you have to point out that you're making a joke, your joke probably isn't that funny.

    2. Re:This Article Is Gay... by morari · · Score: 1

      It would have been just as droll regardless. I just didn't want to be mistaken for some homophobic bigot. I know a lot of people on here play MMOs and I didn't want them to think that I might as well.

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
  22. Conflict of interests by Rapter09 · · Score: 1

    This is a slippery slope. I don't know what server she is on but in WoW i'm on Magtheridon (US), Hyjal, and Whisperwind. I don't find the chatter on any of these servers very offensive. In fact, I find the chat to be quite tame in all of those aformentioned servers. Maybe this particular individual is cursed with being on a bad server. So, please, take advantage of Blizzard's for-pay services and transfer to a different server, or complain enough and get a free transfer. Even Barrens chat on Magtheridon isn't too bad. Chuck Norris jokes and Skullflame Shield links aside...

      Moderating chat in an MMO environment would undercut Blizzard's bottom line a little, and that would most likely make them raise subscription fees. I'm also of the opinion that there is a block\ignore button, and a profanity filter, as well as the ability to leave General Chat, Trade etc. Really, I think what it comes down to is that Blizzard provides the user with the necessary tools, the user just needs to take advantage of those tools. Personally, nothing interesting happens in General chat anyway. This is why I personally gravitate toward a guild. Guilds are a more moderated environment in any case; you can bring guild complaints to the GM and hopefully they're a good person and they do something about it.

      This issue doesn't ultimately have a solution, though, I don't think. Not a practical easily-enacted one, at any rate. You can put band-aids on the problem, you can assign moderators up the yin yang if you want, but it's the kids attitudes that need to be changed, not the game. When you're bringing up an issue like this you shouldn't be lambasting the game and blaming Blizzard, you should probably be looking at more of a widespread problem that seems to be a serious problem in America today: Parenting, and Big Brother. Letting a game teach your kids, letting snotty potty mouthed 12 year olds that need REAL parents teach your kids, and expecting the government or some sort of regulation to fix your own lack of parenting skills is not an excuse.

    1. Re:Conflict of interests by halycon404 · · Score: 1

      Hrm, I wonder. I haven't looked at the scripting language for wow, but isn't this problem solvable by a mod? When I played wow, there were mods that interacted with databases on a net forum. Couldn't someone write a community mod that allows people to rank the level of crap coming from each and every single player on a server, and then put all of that information on an online database? Then everyone can simply choose the level of crap they are willing to put up with and moderate general chat themselves to that level? Though, thinking about it, it would probably break alot of game functionality and whatever poor SOB ran the server would have to make it a pay per use service once the landslide of "but I didn't" started rolling into his inbox... Oh well, I guess we'll all just have to grow thicker skins, and learn to deal with hearing and seeing things we don't agree with.

    2. Re:Conflict of interests by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 1

      Blizzard could solve most of the problems on servers by moving banning and ignoring up one level.

      Ignores should be account-based, rather than character-based. This makes sense, as it's the player, not the character, that's the problem. Many times I've seen a player get ignored for harassing someone, then promptly switch to a new character and begin the harassment again. With nine characters per server and a tiny ignore list limit, the math just doesn't work out here.

      Bans should not be by account (as they currently are) but rather by credit card. This will accomplish two things. First, gold-farmers will have a hell of a difficult time getting a new credit card number each time the ban stick comes down. Secondly, if little Timmy gets the entire family banned (assuming they're all on the same credit card) for three days because he was way over the line in General and ignored the warnings, I rather suspect that some real-world discipline and peer-pressure will be applied to correct the problem.

      --
      P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
    3. Re:Conflict of interests by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      Ignores should be account-based, rather than character-based.

      On one of the servers I play (Deathwing) on, there's a player (girlygirl) that is famous for being on basically the entire servers ignore list as he (and despite the name, it is a he) tends to spam the trade channel with mindless dribble. He apparently discovered another flaw with the ignore system because he deleted his character and remade it with the same exact name, thereby getting himself removed from everyones ban list.

      As to your second argument, good idea, except for the slight problem of the pre-paid game time cards. At that point all that would happen is that all the gold farmers would go out and stock up on game cards and just cycle one in everytime they got an account ban. Of course, this might have an interesting side effect of drying up the game card market in China.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    4. Re:Conflict of interests by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 1

      As to your second argument, good idea, except for the slight problem of the pre-paid game time cards. At that point all that would happen is that all the gold farmers would go out and stock up on game cards and just cycle one in everytime they got an account ban. Of course, this might have an interesting side effect of drying up the game card market in China.

      Hmmm, excellent point. I had forgotten about pre-paid game cards. Bans by credit card would certainly introduce another level of inconvenience for the gold farmers (no bad thing itself!) and would effectively take care of the troll problem, I think. The pre-paid card issue is certainly a tougher nut to crack.

      I'm not familiar with the game cards, but unless the farmers/trolls purchased 30-day cards then it follows that they'd have a reduced return-on-investment upon a ban. With a month-to-month subscription, at worst the troll/farmer will lose $15. A ban falling on a sixty day card would be up to $30, and so on. With the current price of gold, items, and characters, I wonder what the tipping point would be for reasonable profitability.

      Of course, the biggest question of all is why Blizzard hasn't moved on this. If I can come up with a scheme after a few minute's thought that'd cut down on the annoyances in WoW, the bright devs at Blizzard certainly have thought of that months ago. What reason, then, exists for the current state of affairs? Surely any potential revenue lost with an account cancellation due to Timmy's dad getting pissed off about a credit card ban would be more than mitigated by lots of people not cancelling their accounts due to annoying bastards like Timmy. I've heard people speculate that Blizzard has reasons for not wanting gold-farming to cease, but I don't buy the conspiracies. I am genuinely curious, though.
      --
      P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
  23. I'd like to see MMO*s with trial by jury by spun · · Score: 1

    Make a juried legal system part of the game. Let people press charges and sue people, in game. Conviction could mean anything from confiscation of in game resources through "imprisonment" of your avatar, all the way to the "death penalty" of losing your account. Heck, make people pay a month's deposit which is forfeit if you are convicted. Sure, people would try to game the system, but people have been trying to game legal systems since they were invented, I think we know ways to protect against that by now.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:I'd like to see MMO*s with trial by jury by Renraku · · Score: 1

      Great idea.

      Because a population of mostly fowl mouthed racist sexist kids would make an excellent and unbiased jury.

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    2. Re:I'd like to see MMO*s with trial by jury by dannycim · · Score: 1

      Because a population of mostly fowl mouthed racist sexist kids would make an excellent and unbiased jury.

      In my mind, you had feathers coming out of your mouth. (Not a flame, I agree with you) (^,^)

  24. Options in WoW by wuie · · Score: 3, Informative

    Since we're using "Cleaning up Thunder Bluff" as the subject, I'll assume that most of this is directed at the text seen in World of Warcraft. Here are a couple of things you can do to prevent seeing things that might be offensive:

    - Use the profanity filter. This will block out the most offensive words that you may come across in chat.
    - Put them on your ignore list. I know that there's a limited number of people you can put on the ignore list, but if one person's irritating you enough, put them there.
    - Leave general chat. You can always rejoin it at a later time.
    - Finally, you can report someone that's being excessively rude and using slurs. Bans are usually temporary, but they can get the point across. Too many temporary bans will result in a permanent one.

    Of course, these are the options that are present in WoW, I can only assume that other MMOs have similar steps. YMMV.

    1. Re:Options in WoW by WombatDeath · · Score: 1

      I know that there's a limited number of people you can put on the ignore list

      Really? I don't see why; filtering is presumably performed on the client. How much memory does a few dozen (or even a few thousand) UIDs take up?

    2. Re:Options in WoW by 0xABADC0DA · · Score: 0

      Each profession gets an epic 375 level pattern to combat profanity:

      Alchemy: Epic Bar of Soap
      Blacksmith: Hammer of Respect
      Mining: Mote of Censorship
      Enchanting: Greater Moral Power
      ...

      On Equip: Opponent cannot decline a duel

      Then these holy warriors can run around town doing something proactive against all this blasphemy.

    3. Re:Options in WoW by fotbr · · Score: 1

      That'd work real well. You'd have a bunch of lvl 70 13 year olds ganking because they can, and no one can decline to duel them. And probably swearing up a storm doing it.

    4. Re:Options in WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another solution: people with I.Q. under 80 aren't allowed to send messages. Would have the added benefit of filtering out some white noise from people too dumb to get the joke.

    5. Re:Options in WoW by Matthew+Bafford · · Score: 1

      I don't see why [there's a limit to the ignore list]; filtering is presumably performed on the client. How much memory does a few dozen (or even a few thousand) UIDs take up?
      Yes, World of Warcraft limits you to a rather small number of ignores. I think the maximum was somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 when I was playing. I had a tendency to add people who used chat shorthand that particularly annoys me ("u" and "ur" top that list) and I quite frequently had to prune my ignore list to make room.
    6. Re:Options in WoW by LParks · · Score: 1

      Rolling your new chars on a RolePlaying server, or getting yourself and your friends characters transferred onto there may be better than trying to force everyone else to act civil on general servers.

      RP servers are generally moderated better regarding childish abuse of chat, and make sure you report bannable offenses.

    7. Re:Options in WoW by aztektum · · Score: 1

      They could implement a moderating system I guess. User-or-lose "smack down" points for a random % of players with characters on that server (ignoring ones that haven't been logged in for more than 15 days). You can tag someone as a douche, if 5 other people tag them within 10-15 minutes they get a warning or temp ban for the rest of that day or 6 hours, whichever is longer, not exceeding 8?

      I dunno that was just a 2 minute idea.

      However this chick should realize this is an MMO. It isn't going to be filled with your IM friends list. You accept as much each time you let them ding your CC for 14.99.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    8. Re:Options in WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the filtering is done client side, but the actual list is kept server side. The same goes for your friends. What reason this was done, I have no idea. But if you were to log on from someone else's computer, you'll find your friends/ignore list is the same.

    9. Re:Options in WoW by Miniluv · · Score: 1

      There are addons that will remove this limit, and sync your /ignore list across toons on the same realm.

    10. Re:Options in WoW by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      Wow, someone else who used their ignore list the way I do! I did that in EQ years ago and it worked well, as 'chatsp33k' wasn't too prevalent back then, but since I started playing WoW I had to give it up due to the overwhelming quantity of it I run into.

      Now I just stop reading after I see the first "u" or "ur" or whatever. The perspon has nothing to say that I'm interested in reading.

    11. Re:Options in WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When your 5-year-old is told to stick it up his grandmother sideways with a pitchfork, you'll be relieved that the profanity filter was on because ... oh, wait... it'll still say "stick it up your grandmother with a pitchfork"

    12. Re:Options in WoW by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I recommend that Blizzard employees people to monitor chat, and then slap somebody when they are out of line.

      Hell, just create 5 servers with stingent GMS and rules. See how your market likes it.

      I would love for a GM to be in the begining areas telling people, you get out of hand, we'll ban you from this server on RP servers.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    13. Re:Options in WoW by WannaBeGeekGirl · · Score: 1

      I'd mod you up for informative if I could. This was a huge gripe I had with WoW. I haven't played in a year, but back then you were limited in ignores.

      Also, you had no way to tell which people on the list had been permabanned and recreated. So periodically I'd have to just go through and take my chances on clearing out space for the new idiots.

      I guess their code for the lists was hardcoded with the database or otherwise poorly written. It was never fixed while I played. The beta boards and player suggestion boards were full of this complaint. We suggested granting more ignores with level advancement, quests and just about anything you could think of--even eq.

      haha. I understand the "u" and "ur" annoyance far too well. Maybe its because I was born just in time to see _Star Wars_ the first time it came out. I seem to have been instilled with this respect for grammar that some of the younger generations can't appreciate. I was worried about typing wpm on an actual type-writer in highschool though, they're concerned about texting without getting caught in class.

      --
      ~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
    14. Re:Options in WoW by Aneurysm · · Score: 1

      The problem with this is group tags.

      I play on a PvP server, if a large guild has a member embarrasingly ganked multiple times, then they could pool their tags against one user. This person has done nothing wrong, they have been simply PvP'ing on a PvP server, and they may end up with a temp ban for it. A large guild would probably have a few members with tag points for the day.

      When you give immature people a way to tag people as a douche, they'll use it immaturely

    15. Re:Options in WoW by shalla · · Score: 1

      I play WoW and generally don't have problems. While I'm probably not looking for as clean an environment as some parents might be, I tend to be turned off by the ultra-competitive swear-word-laden trash talking that sometimes occurs on WoW, and the slurs are definitely a no-go in my book.

      Parent's list of using the profanity filter, the ignore list, leaving general chat, and reporting people who are excessively rude is good advice.

      I'd add to that:

      1. Choose your server carefully. I tend to have the best luck on general servers. PVP servers tend to bring out the competitive trash talking, and I've had bad luck on RP servers, where for some reason certain people seem to think RP means "watch me try to sexually harass you." (This seems to be my experience only, though. Other friends haven't had this happen, and /ignore fixes it pretty quickly, but it's happened enough that I do associate it with RP servers.)

      2. Surround yourself with the people you want to be with. Join a guild you like and that acts the way you want people to act. When you group with people you like, friend them and keep track of them. If you end up in a group where someone acts a way you don't like, note that and don't group with them again. If they're enough of an asshat, politely call them on it, and if it continues, leave the group. Most of all, treat people the way you want to be treated, and you'll generally be treated the same way back. If you aren't, note that, and avoid them.

      3. If you're uncomfortable with the way general chat is headed, learn how to redirect it. If you can do this with a sense of humor, people generally take it pretty well. (I'm not saying it always works, and it seldom does in, say, Barrens or Elwynn Forest, but most other places you've got a shot.) I've even occasionally used "OMG! A three-headed monkey! ---->" when nothing else came to mind. That tended to stop conversation for a moment or get a "??" response til I could come up with something better to say... and once you've got them distracted, they're easier to lead. (I never said you had to be _sophisticated_ to redirect general chat...)

      4. When someone is baiting you, don't bite. That's what they want. Pat them on the head and /ignore them, or if that bothers you, just don't respond. If they say something horrible, don't tell them, "I reported you!" Just report them. Skip the drama and just quickly and quietly deal with the problem.

      5. If someone uses a term that bothers you in front of you, politely explain that the term bothers you and then move on. I find that a lot of people use the terms "fag" and "gay" in ways that I find offensive. They don't necessarily mean them to be and aren't really thinking about how other people might take what they say. I just mention that the terms bug me because I have gay friends who play, and we keep going, and usually people respect that. I don't make a big deal out of it, and usually they watch what they say around me after that but keep hanging out with me, so it works out. Sometimes I go through this all in tells.

      In other words, it's a lot like dealing with people in real life. Choose your surroundings and your friends. Don't give the attention seekers the glory they want. And if someone you're working/running with does/says something that bugs you, work it out quietly and respectfully without an audience.

      I'm not saying that will clear up everything, but I know that most of the time, I have absolutely no problems on WoW. I'm more likely to be randomly buffed by a stranger than I am to have someone try to steal my adamantite node.

    16. Re:Options in WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure half the people here, both those giving advise and those complaining, have at one point or another acted like the retards thier shaking thier fingers at right now. If you say no, your a fucking liar and deserve to be openly ridiculed in EVERY public internet community. How can I be so sure? Read back a bit in my post and you'll notice I went from nice to asshole in 1 second flat

    17. Re:Options in WoW by Matthew+Bafford · · Score: 2, Funny

      There are addons that will remove this limit, and sync your /ignore list across toons on the same realm.
      Yeah, I think I found out about some of those. I ended up using the ultimate mod, though - deltree. That solved all of my WoW related problems.
    18. Re:Options in WoW by devnull17 · · Score: 1

      It's a cute idea, but insanely cost-ineffective. There are hundreds of channels on each server, and so many nooblets that you couldn't possibly monitor them all. Why don't you hire someone to go through your email by hand and delete the spam? It would work well, but it's just not practical.

  25. Thunder Bluff? by richdun · · Score: 4, Funny

    On behalf of the Taurahe people, I for one am highly offended at the implication that our peaceful, majestic city in the clouds needs cleaning up. Our Bluffwatchers are some of the most efficient custodians I have ever seen, and our program to recycle waste products into compost to aid in Arch Druid Runetotem's morrorwgrain research sets an example for capital cities across Azeroth.

    Despite our bovine nature, and its accompanying production of large piles of waste product, we boast of the cleanest cities on Azeroth or Outlands, free from the usual blight of urban sprawl, like the putrid sewers of Undercity, the molten magma "waste processing" of Ironforge, or the dumbasses in Stormwind who let a dragon take over the city just because she could shapeshift into a "hawt bb." Meanwhile, we have continued to maintain a healthy tourism industry, and, unlike our druidic friends in Darnassus, people actually go to Thunder Bluff on purpose, not just because their cat hit the mouse and they were trying to go to Winterspring to farm.

    In summary, I expect a full apology to be delivered to Cairne by the end of the week. Reparations in the form of well chewed grass, some decent low level balance druid armor, or a free pass to /spit on all rogues, both Alliance and Horde, would be acceptable.

    Celticow
    (Azjol-Nerub)

  26. Simple solution by MikeRT · · Score: 1

    Make people pay a nominal fee to join. To do that, they'll need a real name and contact information. If Johnny the moronic, racist, foul-mouthed 14 year old gets on and breaks the ToS for spewing more racist filth than a 1940s klan rally, blacklist him for a while. Yes, blacklist him as in ban him from that game, and every game the publisher makes for several years. Go one step better and share the list between publishers. Ohhhh little Johnny want to play Halo 3? Too bad, you shouldn't have been acting like a racist fucktard in World of Warcraft.

    1. Re:Simple solution by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Wow. I bet you'd stand in line all night to interview for a job with the thought police. How would you feel if the positions were reversed? Would you like to be locked out of all games your favorite publisher makes for NOT using "profanity"? I doubt it. People seem to be quick to support suppresion of behaviour and speech they don't personally use. You cannot have the right to express your opinions if you deny that right to others. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Note that I am not encouraging you not to have or express any opinions. I'm just ridiculing you for them.

    2. Re:Simple solution by egburr · · Score: 1
      I'll defend your right to say what you want, but I won't defend doing so with a megaphone or loudspeakers, or broadcasting it on radio or TV. You may speak your opinion as long as I am not forced to listen. If you are speaking in a public area, I can usually leave. If you are speaking in my home, I can have you leave. But, if you are amplifying your voice somehow, then it becomes much harder to avoid and you are now in the wrong. There are many reasons governments require permits for large gatherings; one of them is to limit the noise disturbance to specific areas.

      The same concepts should hold true for online games. "Say" what you want, except maybe in high-population-density areas, such as near the banks and auction houses. "Yell" and zone- and world-wide chat channels should be more restrictive in what is allowed.

      In real-life or online, restricted to just your voice or "say", you can follow me around and keep spouting whatever you have to say. I don't object to your right to say it, but you have no right to force it upon me, and I can then complain to the police or GMs that you are harassing me.

      --

      Edward Burr
      Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
    3. Re:Simple solution by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I would agree with the following caveat: if someone is sending you private messages that you don't wish to receive and cannot turn off, fine. If it's a public channel, then you have just as much right to say what you want on it as anyone else. There is almost always an /ignore command that works for all channels, thus giving you an out. Therefore I think your anaolgy is misapplied here.

    4. Re:Simple solution by SevenDigitUID · · Score: 1

      Sure, you have the right to say things, but that doesn't mean that you should, or that it should be deemed appropriate, acceptable, or normal. I am glad that people have the right to say stupid rude things, but I don't think we should encourage it, or be afraid to discourage it because of "ZOMG Censorship".

    5. Re:Simple solution by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful


      You do NOT have the right to say whatever you want, whereever you want, espcially in someone elses home. OR in this case, on someone elses virtual worlds. It's there's they own it. It is not censorship, it is a rule. No one is making you play thr game, it'sd voluntary. In exchange for agreeing to play by the rules, and usually a fee, you can play.

      "Would you like to be locked out of all games your favorite publisher makes for NOT using "profanity"?"
      no, bur I wouldn't play, and I wouldn't tell them they can't do it. There house, their rules.

      And before you do, don't go off the deep end and compar it to something else. This is a PRIVATE game we are talking about, keep it in context.

      "You cannot have the right to express your opinions if you deny that right to others."
      Yes tou can, as a matter of fact.

      Go to a Casino and express you're opinion the a pit boss is an ass. You will be asked to leave, because they have the right to deny ANYBODY service. Just like the MMORPG you are playing.

      ""I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." "
      Sure, when talking about the GOVERNMENT.

      Here's an idea, next time your at someone's house trash talk until they throw you out. Then try to get a legal case against them for censorship. Good fucking luck

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:Simple solution by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Virtual worlds are private, sure. But everyone is paying the same amount to access them. They're meant to be virtual WORLDS, with places that are 'public' and places that are 'private'. Also, what you were talking about was USERS 'flagging' other USERS and getting them banned from every game a publisher published based on that USER flagging. So don't turn around and claim now that you're SIMPLY for the right of game publishers to decide what to allow in their games.

      When you go to a casino, you voluntarily suspend some of your rights. For example, the right to property(hint: that was a joke). The right to be naked. The right to wear an adult diaper, well, if they end up making that rule. But the pit boss, and every one else there, is also voluntarily giving up some rights too. Now, your argument is that people give up their right to certain speech upon entering an online game. I argue that that shouldn't be the case. Should a game publisher disagree with that, of course they have the right to do things differently. But why is it so hard for people to simply ignore that which 'offends' them? then we'd all have to give up fewer rights in more situations. Especially if you're claiming that a majority of the users of those games are profane. If they're the majority, why should the minority opinion rule? Because it's your opinion?

    7. Re:Simple solution by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between 'discouraging' it and banning people from games. what about when the 14 year old is 18 and has grown up? etc. etc. blah. over 30 posts on this topic today and it hasn't gotten any more interesting. (please note that that isn't intended as a shot at you)

    8. Re:Simple solution by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You also suspend your 'rights' to say whatever you want when you walk into ANY private establishment. That includes virtual ones. Weather they call them virtual worlds, or virtual casino's.

      It's hard because of the volume of people doing it. It isn't the occasional person. It's also after the effect, not prior.

      remember your arguement next time you get spam.

      Conisdering you post, I am sure you don't filter spam, that would be censorship to your mistaken view of what censorship is.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Simple solution by SevenDigitUID · · Score: 1

      Warnings, loss of chat privs for a time, temp bans. All of these can be used without resorting to an outright ban. If repeated warnings dont teach said 14 year old to change their behavior, then perhaps a ban is a good idea. Children need to learn that they are subject to consequences, some adults could use the same lesson.

    10. Re:Simple solution by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      not. at. all. I supposed that with a handle like 'geekoid' you'd be able to read. apparently not. When USERS of virtual worlds can get USERS of virtual worlds banned from games, something's wrong. if PUBLISHERS of games want ot ban USERS of games for whatever reason, fine, as long as they refund any unused money. I put the important words in all caps so that you would have less trouble understanding what should be a pretty easy-to-understand point.

  27. Go home care bear! by earnest+murderer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just kidding... I play on a Roleplay PVP server which is more or less equivalent to asking a bum to emote while he rapes you. Not my first choice, but if I want to play with my meatspace friends...

    I blame anonymity myself. I mean I think that everyone from the Pope down to Jimmy Swaggart is pretty much an asshole at heart. Most of us have a handle on it most of the time and some people even try to avoid pushing other people's "buttons". But lack of accountability is a huge problem, add anonymity and some abstraction to the mix and many people loose their only reason for not being a jerk. It doesnt help that many people refuse to accept or assign accountability based on their own political motivations or worse, whim.

    It is believed by some that many people are perfectly nice in person but for some unknown reason they become animalistic online... I think this is flawed logic. It's far more likely that said person(s) is a jerk, but concequences keep them from acting out.

    So yea, a meaningful identity online would help tremendously. But that's a can of toxic, radio active worms, even if you did open it and balance exposure/anonymity in a way that kept people happy. Eventually (and not very long I'm sure) some politician somewhere would wreck it for everyone in a dead of nigh bill, or simply declare it their purview.

    In the long run I think I would prefer to live with it as-is, and if I want decorum I'll get within arms reach.

    --
    Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
  28. Online Idiots by Vexor · · Score: 1
    This is partially stemming from parents not beating their kids. I'm not talking Black & Blue faces and "I fell down the stairs" beatings. I'm talking about a belt to the behind. I'm sure many of you have seen YouTube videos of kids going literally apeshit when told to turn of the XBox and go to bed.

    Granted I'm sure there are kids who are decent and fun to play online with. I'm talking about the vast majority though. This crap doesn't just happen online. The online factor is only spreading it to the masses. And souring many of the older generations online enjoyment.

    As for WoW and all the rest it would be nice to see some features that allow you a global ignore list so regardless of which character you're playing or the asshat is playing they're still /ignored. GuildWars is one of the only MMOs I know of with a feature like this.

    This new generation needs to learn some respect. Without it our future is screwed.

    --
    ~Vexed and loving it!
  29. Don't like it? Don't play. by _bug_ · · Score: 0, Troll

    Seriously. Don't play. If these MMOs saw a significant drop in its users due to this sort of thing I think they'd work to find some creative solutions for the problem pretty quickly. As it is, that doesn't appear to be happening. Even the author, rather than quit, is going to stick around and try to clean things up.

    So either the problem isn't really that bad or the author gets entertainment out of acting as moral police and (en)forcing their moral views on others and would prefer it this way to begin with.

  30. do YOU remember being a teenager? by desmondmonster · · Score: 1

    One of the things I've noticed as I've gotten older (I'm 24 now) and worked in an office environment is the natural tendency for people to be civil towards each other. There's some petty politics, sure, but this common courtesy is what keeps a collection of strangers (ie, society) together. It's instinctual, but can break down when one is granted anonymity. Teenagers just aren't like this. Some of the things I said - and were said to me - in high school really were pretty fucking mean. Most adults in the real world wouldn't last a second if they talked that way to each other and it's still hard for us to believe that kids say such graphic stuff to other kids' faces. Did some of you have similar experiences? Younger people just don't have the verbal restraint and consequences instinct that older folks do, so they have no reason not to spew the garbage that goes through their minds. If I'd had a large forum like an MMOG to be offensive when I was 15 I probably would have done the same thing; instead, all I had were aol chat rooms. Teenagers just don't have the same social wiring as adults do, and we're used to interacting with obnoxious teens on our terms... and it's alarming to journey into their world where civilized behavior isn't compulsory. I don't think the answer is more authority. When have teenagers ever responded well to that? They'll grow out of it eventually.

    1. Re:do YOU remember being a teenager? by svendsen · · Score: 1

      I remember quite well. I remember swearing tons. And I remember the consequences of when I was caught. Now when I was a teenager (back in the early nineties) the Internet as it is today had not taken off. Email was seen as a dorky thing and BBSs were great. Moderation galore. Most places I was on abuse = goodbye and yoru name went to all the other BBSs.

      Now fast forward to this day and age how much consequence is there for their actions and I think that's the difference.

    2. Re:do YOU remember being a teenager? by desmondmonster · · Score: 1
      Again, it seems like you were in on scenes where adults set the tone and would moderate you (or parent you, if you will) according to Rules of Polite Society. Nowadays it's the bratty teenagers in charge and I find their banter on WoW as bad as their insipid myspace pages.

      I agree that if their parents knew what they were saying, kids would probably be more civil.

      Perhaps it's another symptom of large societies. I remember those early 90s where it really seemed like everyone knew everyone and you had to guard your reputation because there were only so many places to hang out. But these days since everyone's online everywhere you can alienate tons of people and still meet new ones.

    3. Re:do YOU remember being a teenager? by svendsen · · Score: 1

      Agreed 100%. Since they don't run the risk of their name being ruined they have no fear of their actions.

  31. The more you try to clean things up... by moore.dustin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...the louder the people will get. If you tell an idiot in chat to hush up, does he? No. Instead he doubles his attacks and focuses them at you. You cannot change this, sorry, it cannot be done. Instead, use the functions and tools in game to ignore people and leave chat channels. I am sure there is some UI thing you can get that will help you block people in chat who curse, yell, whatever.

    What a dumb article though. Really, how can anyone believe that they can clean up the chat rooms where people with anonymity reside. It just wont happen. It takes people years of online participation in one community or another to stop using LOL let along stop attacking people.

    You can use this as your litmus test though. If "teh" and "pwn" are still in use, nothing has changed and people are still tards online.

    1. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by Pvt_Waldo · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Theoretically insightful because you're a troll who's posted but other than that, bullshit.

      Not to put it in the same category but if your reasoning was true, we'd not have stories of civil rights changes for example. We'd be saying, "How can you really expect racism to vanish when it's just a fact that some people are racist. Just live with it, it's there, welcome to the real world."

    2. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by moore.dustin · · Score: 1

      No. It is the factor of anonymity that makes it vastly differently. In the civil rights movement, if you called someone something, people attached a name to the statement. People knew what you did. Online, that is not the case, so things will not change.

      You are the troll who should have read my post and noticed I specifically mentioned the factor of anonymity.

    3. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by egburr · · Score: 1
      The guild I'm in has a rule about keeping chat clean. We have kicked people out for arguing and escalating after being reminded. We have had people leave because of the rule. Despite that, there are still over 400 people in our guild. We enforce this on our teamspeak server, too.

      If only we could do the same for the world- and zone-wide channels and for yell. Leave "say" alone, because it is local and limited in scope, except maybe in high-population-density areas. As for group chat, well, I can always leave the group if it becomes too annoying, or kick them out if I'm the leader.

      It would be nice to have an option to select a person's name and vote to ban them from the channel, and if enough people do it over a set amount of time, then it would happen. Start with a short duration, and increase it every time a new ban is voted in. Also, have this track on the account owner, not individually by character.

      --

      Edward Burr
      Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
    4. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by Pvt_Waldo · · Score: 1

      The guild I'm in also has rules that are similar. The other day we had a new person who began to let loose with some pretty mysoganistic and homophobic comments. We called him on it, not by treating him as an idiot and telling him to shut up, but by treating him as a real person and saying, "This is not acceptable to us." It doesn't work every time but just acting like a real person and then treating others like real people is a powerful way to approach it. Sometimes the act of treating someone as a person instead of a problem is the way to go.

    5. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by moore.dustin · · Score: 1

      You can certainly enforce some changes on the small scale of a guild, sure. My old guild was the same way. It worked well actually, but to think you can apply the same standards outside of the scope of a guild makes you nuts! Really, all you can hope for is to keep your guild chat channels clean. Anything beyond that is a pipe dream.

    6. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by egburr · · Score: 1

      It's only a pipe dream because Blizzard won't do it. What I suggested is certainly possible to implement, but Blizzard doesn't want to risk losing the monthly payments of a good portion of people who can't or won't exhibit any self-control mainly because there are no consequences to their actions. Behavior like that in real life would get them kicked out if they didn't stop and maybe even arrested if they persisted.

      --

      Edward Burr
      Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
    7. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised you got called a troll because you pretty much hit the nail on the head. Getting pissed at them just feeds them just like a little kid discovering that grossing out adults gives them some power. The best way to fight them is to ignore them. Nothing discourages them more than boredom. Once they get into a game for a while and start building bonds with other players they start becoming pissed at the online idiots also.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    8. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Guild I am in has an anything goes policy. It works and it is fun. If a person gets offended they are free to leave. If you are the sort of person who wants to censor another persons thoughts and words then as a Guild we would not want you anyway.

      The whole point of online is its not real life. You can say anything you want and should be encourage too. There's nothing more funny than seeing how worked up you can make some people get over a few lines of text.

      You have your profanity filters and your ignore button. Fuck off and sue them while letting the rest of us have fun.

    9. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by khallow · · Score: 1

      ...the louder the people will get. If you tell an idiot in chat to hush up, does he? No. Instead he doubles his attacks and focuses them at you. You cannot change this, sorry, it cannot be done. Instead, use the functions and tools in game to ignore people and leave chat channels. I am sure there is some UI thing you can get that will help you block people in chat who curse, yell, whatever.

      It is an excellent point that well designed systems don't have a problem with rudeness. The users quickly filter out the offender and the admins ban him.
    10. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by AntiNazi · · Score: 1

      This is not really the case though, with MMOs that I have experienced. During my time playing WoW (about 2.5 years I think, close enough anyway) on Destromath there was a Horde Shaman named Daish. This guy was a real idiot. He was the best pvper the game has ever seen (It's true because he said it). In any battlegrounds he would just constantly flame all the "newbies." To the point where it was a serverwide joke to tell someone or some group to "get to the tower newbies" (this was a personal favorite of his).

      Due to constant reporting he was eventually warned that another ban would be permanent (which he stupidly bragged about). At this point he couldn't be an asshat any longer. Well around this time everyone on the horde just quit dealing with him, thus his enjoyment was extremely hindered as no one would help him or anything. He quit. Quit the horde anyway, rerolled on alliance on the same server for a while (I think they ended up disowning his ass too, not sure), but he was no longer an issue for the horde. Sure it took a couple months but it basically serves as an example that if everyone just quits dealing in anyway (I mean it, not "well he offered a lot of gold for xyz", just nothing period) with the person they won't be able to effectively continue the game and will move on.

      Sure they can come back with another name, but as soon as they start up it's easy to call them on it and it gets them ostracized again. If they come back with a new name and act civil, GOOD, that was the objective right?

    11. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by RPI+Geek · · Score: 1

      The more you try to clean things up ... the louder the people will get. If you tell an idiot in chat to hush up, does he? No. Instead he doubles his attacks and focuses them at you. You cannot change this, sorry, it cannot be done.

      From my experience administrating a CS:Source server, about 3/4 of the people will stop their annoying behavior if you just ask them nicely. For the people who don't follow the rules though, my experience is that the best thing to do is ban them. Our server has a strict no racism policy and the admins are fairly intolerant of people being general jackasses, too. The end point I get at is that I agree with you that people will never stop acting stupidly on the internet, but there's at least one good way to handle it: good administrators.

      --

      - "Nobody came out that night, not one was ever seen. But Old Man Stauf is waiting there, crazy sick and mean!"
    12. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by Sigma+7 · · Score: 1

      ...the louder the people will get Only in the lawless "wild-west". If the game is suitably controlled (i.e. there is actually an admin team), jerks will be handled without problem.

      Take a look at wikipedia - some people only do things once and learn from their mistakes. Others continue or perform retalitory vandalism - in these cases, a simple post to WP:ANI will result in a quick block. The same thing will work for an online game - as soon as you see someone jerking off, right click on that user, and select "warn". If the user collects enough warnings, admins come and take a look at what's going on (including related chat history.) If warnings don't stop bad users, right-click and select report user.

    13. Re:The more you try to clean things up... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Then you throw them out of the club. You do it loud so everybody know, then you say "Anyone else want to be uncivil?"

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  32. Re:Colleen by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

    Not to feed the flamebait, but he's right. If you don't like it, leave the channel.

    The people who wish the internet was a sweet world of marshmallow fluff are doomed to perpetual disappointment; too much of our racial Freudian Id is floating around out there, and plenty of otherwise normal people can be complete dicks online. You just gotta learn to live with it, or keep playing neopets.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  33. Switch servers? by Oz0ne · · Score: 1

    I've never experienced anything remotely like that anywhere in WoW. Not even close. The most offensive things I've seen are the chuck norriss jokes in the barrens. While they're annoying, it's a stretch to find them offensive.

    1. Re:Switch servers? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Uhm, because we all know running away from the problem made it go away...

  34. Solutions... by Jerf · · Score: 1

    Step one is to take the problem seriously. A lot of people don't. "Sticks and stones may break my bones" most properly ends with "but words can sear my soul." That one stupid saying (in its original form) has probably done more damage than good.

    Step two is to create some sort of social mechanism. My suggestion, which I haven't seen yet, is a sort of social network where you can indicate which players you like to play with and which you don't, and automated match-making software will help you hook up with people who have similar "tastes" in people. Thus, you don't have to "ban" the fucktards, you just let the system naturally put them together, where they can be immature at each other all they want (and continue paying subscription fees), whereas other gamers naturally gravitate towards people who want to play more like them. I don't know of anything that works this way; closest I've seen is ways to get some people "banned".

    (It'd take some thought to make the system resistant to attacks, but to a first approximation, if you simply weight "I don't like this user" significantly higher than "I like them", then even a massive coordinated attack by the fucktards to "like" people won't work.)

    1. Re:Solutions... by Reapy · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't really care what the words are because of the source. If some 16 year old calls you a homo because he killed you in a video game, and you are seriously hurt by this, then you need to rethink your opinion of yourself. Who cares what this kid thinks. Just ignore them and laugh at them to yourself. I laugh all the time at the dumb stuff kids say to me.

      And just learn a few rules to win all arguments by. If you are better at the game then the kid, just beat him, then tell him that you beat him. "Did you just die? I think you are dead! That's rough! My favorite part is how you act like you have a chance to kill me, but you really don't, thats so cute!"

      If you aren't better at the game, just tell tell him "Sorry I couldn't spend all day getting good at a video game. But hey, look at you, you have a sweet kill to death ratio in halo, good job, you've really made something of yourself."

      That ought to shut most people up and/or get the rest of the server laughing at them. But most of the time, the stuff they say is pretty stupid. If the conversation still makes you uncomfortable, /ignore. If no ignore, learn to ignore it.

      A lot of people in this world are going to piss you off. Learn to deal with it. I learned in high school when people said this bullshit to my face. Now it doesn't bother me, and I've had a much happier adult life then in my teen years.

      If this STILL bothers you, join one of the many adult gaming communities out there. Meet some great people, and play with some mature gamers who are going to be a lot better then the trash talkers.

      And while I'm on it, why is everybody so nuts about this. We should censor the internet? We need to moderate it? What the hell? Let the server owner decide how he wants to run his server. Word filters are dumb. On siera's freestyle basketball I cant say "white", it gets filtered out, that's pretty hilarious, and the people who talk shit are the first ones to know how their favorite word can be typed to get around the filter.

      But cmon people, why are we talking away the last bastion of anonymity and freedom we have left? I guess it's already gone. I'm sure glad I got on the net 12 or so years ago, before people were going batshit insane over a few bits shooting back and forth over the net.

    2. Re:Solutions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Precisely, and I have the perfect retort for "your mama" lines. I actually do strongly dislike my mother, so when someone says something along the lines of "ur mom is so ugly..." I just say, "Oh, no, she's much uglier than that. The fucking cunt."

      Derails those punks faster than you can say "cunt." They don't quite know how to reply.

    3. Re:Solutions... by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      if you simply weight "I don't like this user" significantly higher than "I like them", then even a massive coordinated attack by the fucktards to "like" people won't work.

      However, a massive coordinated attack by the fucktards to "hate" people would work quite effectivly. Just drive the noise ratio high enough and the signal is lost. I do like the idea to some extent, but I think voting on someones play style or such would provide better results than a simple like/hate thing. One thing I wish you could do is flag loot ninjas. Get enough flags and you get some sort of mark on your character and maybe get banned from things like the LFG/LFM tools.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    4. Re:Solutions... by Jerf · · Score: 1

      However, a massive coordinated attack by the fucktards to "hate" people would work quite effectivly.
      Yes... it would be very effective at segregating the fucktards from everybody else.

      I don't think you've grasped the essence of my proposal.
    5. Re:Solutions... by Jerf · · Score: 1

      And while I'm on it, why is everybody so nuts about this. We should censor the internet? We need to moderate it? What the hell?
      I don't think you got my point. Nobody gets banned in my system, just shuffled around to be with people they like.

      On that note, I'm not necessarily "hurt" to be called a "homo"... but is it really such a stretch for you to imagine that given the choice between playing with someone that immature and someone not that immature, I might prefer the second? You're thinking too black and white. There's middle ground between "emotional pain" and "uncaring", and in fact there's values outside of those two endpoints too, like, say, enjoyment, something you don't really seem to be accounting for in your rant. My goal isn't to "avoid annoyance". I can do that by not buying the game at all. (Actually my current choice, too.) I'm shooting for an enjoyable environment.

      And part of the point of my system is that it works with just identities, not identities tied to real people. Trying to avoid the need for that (which has manifest problems) was part of the point.

      I suspect it was too subtle of a system for a Slashdot post, especially described so briefly.
  35. One solution: An 'asshole' button. by grnbrg · · Score: 1
    Years ago I had a friend make a (completely unworkable) suggestion for cars -- an "Asshole Button". Some jerk cuts you off? Point the remote at his car and push the button, and a light turns on on his license plate -- and yours. The cops would be allowed to ticket (and reset the lights) of anyone with 5 lights lit. Fun, but it would never work in real life. Online, however, it becomes very possible.

    It could be very workable in a MMORPG, though. Tagging someone with one "asshole" point could cost your avatar 5 points. Points could diminish at a rate of 1 per hour in-game. Anyone accumulating more than 25 points has an automatic 3 day suspension (or other punishment) applied to their account.

    Yeah, it could be abused somewhat, but your gang of 25 griefers could punt a total of 5 people before needing to take a break.

    User based moderation, with an attached cost.

  36. Stop right there! by halycon404 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    There is nothing wrong with the system. Don't like general chat? don't read it! Don't like Dumb-b***ard's views, ignore him. It is not Blizzard's job to make sure we all feel warm and fuzzy about how different people discuss things in game. Nor is it our jobs as gamers to censor other gamers simply because they are being assholes, I'm personally busy playing the game. If you have a problem with it, yet the mass majority of players playing the game(wow is 7million now right?) don't have a problem with it. Then maybe, just going out on a limb here, maybe the problem is you?

    Really, how did this article end up in slashdot of all places? I expect this to be an "breaking news story" on one of the major stations. "Oh no, little Timmy could learn the word "Fuck" from playing wow, news at 11"

  37. Oh if it worked... by Gertlex · · Score: 1

    We call it the ignore button. It...ignores people. And amazingly enough...it works! If it's implemented in a decent fashion...

    My example is old, but with Battle.net for Diablo 2, anyone you squelch/ignore/block is only temporary. Next time you log in it's reset.

    I haven't played that "soft crack" in a couple years (ok, not online...). Nor have I graduated to the "hard crack" known as WoW.
  38. My advice - move on by scuba_steve_1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Choose you servers more carefully.

    For example, I play COD2 exclusively. I belong to a online gaming "clan" that hosts this game and a number of others (BF2, BF2142, UO). In support of these games, we maintain game servers, a Vent voice chat server, forums, and a public website. Our overall philosophy is to provide an environment for fun and cheat-free play. We do not allow in-game typed profanity or harassment of other players. As far as voice chat goes, we only allow profanity in our 16 and older Vent channels. All other channels are rated G. Also, regardless of what channel you are in, harassment (sexist, racial, or otherwise) is NEVER tolerated. How do we manage it? Mature RCONs and Vent channel admins...who are on most of the time and available via IM, email, and phone when necessary.

    Are we unique? Not at all. There are many mature groups of players who have banded together to form such positive playing environments.

    If you are stuck on a Blizzard server, my sympathies.

  39. What is "civilized"? by StephenW · · Score: 1

    Sure, a civilized community sounds nice, but who decides what is civilized? If we limit people to one person's opinion of propriety, many others will feel needlessly limited by it. One solution is to let everyone say what they want without filters, a radical idea called freedom of speech. The other is to eliminate communication altogether. Then again, if you do that, it's not really a community anymore, is it? As others have suggested, I recommend the "/ignore" command. It can work wonders.

  40. What, there aren't enough actual PROBLEMS today? by untaken_name · · Score: 1

    We have to spend cycles worrying about childish behaviour on the internet? Last I checked, we* were in a war, poverty is killing people in "the greatest country in the world", oppression is rampant throughout much of the world...but hey, fuck all that. Let's worry about the language people in a FUCKING GAME use. Sounds more important to me.

    *yes, I'm from the U.S. If you aren't, replace "we were" with "America is" and go on about your day. Thanks.

  41. I've only got one thing to say to this.... by Bourbon+Man · · Score: 1

    STFU nub, lolz, wtf luzer, kthxbye!!!1!

    All joking aside (yes, I meant that humorously), you pretty much have to deal with it. Use ignore. Report offenders. Don't play. Quit the game and make sure you let them know you're leaving because they don't enforce their own policies. Make a guild of tattle-tales. Make up your mind to ignore it and not let it bother you, instead of letting it dominate your game experience.

  42. To quote a good friend of mine.. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

    ... named Anonymous:


    If you don't like the language or behavior of the people playing... go play something else? Or, leave the general chat. Or, only talk to people in your guild. Or, go play a RP server (blocking the griefing nubs who bother you when their server is down).

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    1. Re:To quote a good friend of mine.. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      Well, I fucked that up. I gotta learn to preview, the quote was "gb2gaia"

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  43. Seriously now... by Devir · · Score: 1

    Do you expect newcomers to /ignore 2 of the 3 hours they play?

    You can't autoboot someone who is on X ammount of ignore lists. It'd make for some serious DoS potential.

    Even on ignore people can still find a multitude of ways to be annoying.

    The only sure way to assure the user community of nice and polite players is to have a RL mobile unit in each city that will personally visit the basement of the annoying troll and give him a nice and polite looking over with an aluminum baseball bat.

    1. Re:Seriously now... by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      "Looking for Bat in Central Wisconsin Region."

      I like it.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    2. Re:Seriously now... by ottothecow · · Score: 1

      you cant autoboot but all it takes is a quick glance from a GM at message logs to determine whether or not someone was ignored 50 times because they are a spammer or 50 times simply because they are annoying

      --
      Bottles.
    3. Re:Seriously now... by teh_chrizzle · · Score: 1

      The only sure way to assure the user community of nice and polite players is to have a RL mobile unit in each city that will personally visit the basement of the annoying troll and give him a nice and polite looking over with an aluminum baseball bat.

      or just make all games with communities of anykind be 18 and up. that's 85% of your offenders right there. minors shouldn't be consorting with people online anyway due to the dangers of online predators.

      speaking of predators... are you predators out there aware that CS, live, and WoW are ripe with nubile and energetic young boys? if you guys worked a little harder or were maybe a little more vigilant there wouldn't be quite so many squeakers online, and the ones you guys missed wouldn't be such a problem.

      --
      sarcasm:
      -noun
      1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
    4. Re:Seriously now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what "predators"?
      Don't fall for the propaganda of the "won't anyone think of the children" set. Besides, what makes an 18 year old less prone to "predators" than a 17 year old?
      The kid's not going to learn common sense for another 5 years anyway.

  44. As an Adult by Boap · · Score: 1

    I personally do not want filters of any sort on the game as they hinder the communication that goes on between people. These are just words they can not hurt you at the very worst you are going to be offended but guess what... What you may find offensive I may find humorous and what you find humorous may be offensive to me.

  45. Capt. Shouty and Team Tourette's by PhoenixOne · · Score: 1

    For me, it's not that the internet isn't all nice (I accept and, sometimes, enjoy the hell out of that ;)), its just that I would like to be able to play a FPS online without being called a fag (or worse) by some 12yo.

    The new Live rating system helps but, more times then not, I find myself in a room with "Capt. Shouty and Team Tourette's!". The only solution I've found is removing the headset.

    --
    Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
    1. Re:Capt. Shouty and Team Tourette's by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Oh, I've played with them as well. It's especially hard when you've got a headset on and they turn out to be a Squeaker or some other annoying internet sub-breed.

      It's definitely nice to be able to group your friends together, find people you don't mind playing with, and keep the annoying types to a minimum...The problem is, you have to go out into the world of jerks to find the people you want to hang out with.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  46. A change would be nice by ScotchForBreakfast · · Score: 1

    The sad part is how little developers and the various people involved do to prevent all the hating and racist crap in online gaming. I report the racists and such on XBL, does it do anything? I've no idea and I have my doubts based on how often I run into those folks. Could they stop it altogether? Probably not, but few seem to even try to do anything about it. I also would like to see some sort of system where you could choose to join games where people are just looking to have a good time without the childish trash talk, cursing at each other, racism and such. Some of my best gaming experiences are when you just get a bunch of folks together and everyone has fun together and we all enjoy the game and laugh together when something funny happens. On the other hand I avoid some games and playing online at times because of the pervasive jerk culture that has developed there.

  47. Other party-line systems solved this long ago by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This problem has been solved elsewhere. I used to spend a lot of time working in video production and in the theater; in 90% of theaters and studios, they use a headset intercom system made by ClearCom. It's a pretty simple "party line" (or sometimes 2 channel) system, where everybody has a headset and a belt pack, with a PTT switch. The PTT can also be locked on, if you need hands-free operation.

    However, the designers realized that letting people lock on their mics could get pretty annoying in a hurry, for exactly the reasons you mentioned -- everybody else on the circuit doesn't need to hear you breathing, swallowing, talking to people not on the 'com, etc.

    So they have a feature where the person at the master console can hit a button, and 'unlock' everyone's mics that are locked on. The way this is done is actually a pretty neat use of analog electronics, but it's not really relevant. The point is that the PTT-lock is a "soft lock" (the button doesn't lock down mechanically or anything), so it can be remotely unset. So that way if the person at the master console needs to break in, or just gets tired of hearing you breathe into your mic, they can just hit the button and shut you up (at least long enough to reach down and hit the button again).

    Seems like this would be a good feature for video games that feature a team 'com, because essentially they're doing the same things as ClearComs in a production studio. You'd have a team leader, and they'd have the capability of unhooking people's stuck mics if they started yelling at their mom.

    The only hardware change is that you have to have the PTT switch as a separate control line, rather than as part of the audio feed. (You have to have separate "headphone out," "mic in," and "PTT" lines, like most 2-way radios, rather than just "headphone" and "mic," with the PTT switch installed in the mic line.) This allows the mic keying to be done in the console, rather than in the headset -- which is really where it should be, even on a full-duplex connection. Also, it would let you actually use the PTT switch as more than just a switch for your own mic; you could set it up so that a quick double-tap of the PTT by the person in charge would unset other people's mics, and/or you could put the PTT switch any place you wanted, not just on your headset. (You could use it via a footswitch, or on your controller, or any other place you wanted.)

    Anyway, 'teamspeak' and other systems are relatively new in the video game world, but the problems you're describing aren't new or very unique; they're all solved issues in other mediums, and hopefully someone in the video-game world will eventually take a look at some of those other systems and borrow the solutions.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Other party-line systems solved this long ago by harl · · Score: 1

      That a neat feature and good for theatre but it's obsolete for online voice comms. The feature set of Ventrilo, and I assume team speak, far far surpasses what you've explained.

      With Ventrilo anyone with server admin, channel admin too I think, role can mute them. Server admins can also then drag them to another channel and tell them what the problem is.

      Also you never need to lock the PTT in the on position in online gaming. If you can't PTT seamlessly while playing you need a new PTT button.

      On every Vent server I've used, multiple MMPOG and competititve FPS games, PTT is mandatory. Those that have refused were kicked because it's simply too disruptive.

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
  48. My Troll Warrior will dance nude on Thunder Bluff by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    whether you like it or not.

    Just as my Care Bear guild leader Kehrbehr will get a group of Druid Taureans to dance as bears whenever it pleases him.

    Just use Ignore. I'm far more concerned with Gold Spamming, quite frankly ...

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  49. There are a few things by thebdj · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1) As others mentioned, leave general chat. This should resolve close to 90% of the problems.
    2) Find a game not filled with immature teenagers (or adults, trust me they can be just as dumb) or another server. I played WoW for a LONG time and never had much problem with the discussions on RP servers. I never did play on a straight PvP or general server. I have since moved to Ryzom, and the CSRs are quick to mute or kick off anyone doing this sort of stupidity.
    3) For games with voice chat, turn it off. Seriously, I would not make people suffer through hearing my voice, even for helpful communication. Please do not torture us with yours. Of course, it is muted whenever I do play an online FPS, so I guess I am saving my own ears.
    4) If people are being offensive, report it to the Moderators (or whatever your game calls them). I do not think an MMO exists where there are not moderators of some form. Most of them are willing to help and will resolve issues like this, if you present the issues in a calm and reasonable manner.

    Now, you can almost forget everyone suddenly changing their ways, and unfortunately there isn't much you can do to force them to change. While people can be muted or temporarily banned, you will almost never get permanent removal unless you blatantly violent the EULA. Short of making threats or committing some sort of illegal act, they will probably return. The best you can do is limit exposure using the tools provided by the game. It is not the best solution, but if the people acting like total idiots find out they are without any friends and that no one wants to play with them, perhaps they will finally leave. (Though, that may also be wishful thinking.)

    --
    "Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
    1. Re:There are a few things by aafiske · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "2) Find a game not filled with immature teenagers (or adults, trust me they can be just as dumb) or another server. I played WoW for a LONG time and never had much problem with the discussions on RP servers. I never did play on a straight PvP or general server. I have since moved to Ryzom, and the CSRs are quick to mute or kick off anyone doing this sort of stupidity."

      So if your neighborhood is getting worse, you should just move? No point in trying to fund the police better to up patrols, etc? Moving is not always an option. If my friends and I all like playing a game together, and that game becomes popular and flooded with asshats that we can't do a thing about, we just have to give up and quit?

      "3) For games with voice chat, turn it off. Seriously, I would not make people suffer through hearing my voice, even for helpful communication. Please do not torture us with yours. Of course, it is muted whenever I do play an online FPS, so I guess I am saving my own ears."

      Good luck with that. Unless you only like running around solo and blasting everything that moves, you need voice to communicate and coordinate. Turning off voice in, say, Halo 2 == losing.

  50. Whine by TimeElf1 · · Score: 0

    So WoW doesn't have a ignore function? Really if you don't like all the "incivility" you could always go play another game. You have free will go exercise it and read a book or better yet go outside. Clearly the game isn't fun anymore if you can't just ignore a few immature players.

    --
    Cannot find REALITY.SYS. Universe halted.
  51. A better solution for the problem by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    But if you had an auto-ban feature on WoW where if you get 10 ban requests from ten different people in a small enough amount of time you'll automatically get kicked.

    A better auto-ban is if you curse and swear and 10 total people report you in a 72 hour period, you lose the ability to post to Chat (/1, /2, /3) other than Party Chat (/p) and Guild Chat (/g) for 72 hours. Parties (/p) are only 5 people and Guilds can always demote you to a level not able to post to Guild Chat, so those are self-regulating.

    One guild I was in, Femme Fatale, had to kick a n00b who cursed all the time. Guild chat is used a lot in that guild, so it just became too much. It was a guy, of course.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  52. Text MUDs? by BaronHethorSamedi · · Score: 1

    Long before WoW brought the graphical MMO into the limelight, text MUDs were doing the same thing with no pictures. They're still around, and in my experience tend to attract far fewer of the people TFA complains of. When the user interface forces you to use words and words only, the kiddies/spambots/racist losers usually get bored very quickly and leave.

    Not to say that griefing doesn't happen--it just tends to happen in complete, coherent sentences.:)

  53. B does not equal C. by Tetris+Ling · · Score: 1

    Jesus. That's the dumbest argument I've heard all day, and I've just come from the WoW forums. The idea that the words "shit" and "poo" are linguistically equal is just mind-boggling to me. "Shit" is not equivalent to "poo". "Shit" is more vulgar. It's vulgarity is what makes it different! Our language allows us to speak in varying degrees of politeness and formality depending on the situation. A word may not be intrinsically "bad", at least in the moral sense, but it can certainly be impolite or rude. As a matter of fact, the presence of a euphemism of substitute for a word is a great indication that it might not be appropriate for all audiences.

    I love to swear as much as the next guy, but you're overlooking a great deal of the richness of our language if you think swear words are interchangeable with their less offensive brethren. There is a time and a place for both. Let's not pretend otherwise.

    1. Re:B does not equal C. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      "Shit" is more vulgar.

      Why?

      It's vulgarity is what makes it different!

      It's different because it's vulgar and it's vulgar because it's different? Makes perfect sense.

      I love to swear as much as the next guy, but you're overlooking a great deal of the richness of our language if you think swear words are interchangeable with their less offensive brethren.

      What seperates the 'swear words' from the 'less offensive bretheren'?

      There is a time and a place for both. Let's not pretend otherwise.

      But pretending is exactly what we're doing, as a society. We pretend that certain combinations of letters are somehow intrinsically bad. What is the logical basis for the differences? If there is none, what is the basis, then? And I don't see why it's "dumb" to say that synonyms are equivalent. That's what makes them synonyms, isn't it?

    2. Re:B does not equal C. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's vulgarity is what makes it different! Our language allows us to speak in varying degrees of politeness and formality depending on the situation. A word may not be intrinsically "bad", at least in the moral sense, but it can certainly be impolite or rude. As a matter of fact, the presence of a euphemism of substitute for a word is a great indication that it might not be appropriate for all audiences.

      That's just latent racism.

      I've yet to find a set of English synonyms where the "vulgar" form wasn't derived from a german root and the "noble" form wasn't derived from a romance (i.e., Latin or latin-derived language) root. And generally the vulgar/noble distinction goes back to the Norman conquest of England.

      We're all gung-ho about eliminating racism, but our language encodes the very attitudes we're trying eliminate.

      At least we've gotten rid of most of the gender issues in our vocabulary. So there's hope. . .

    3. Re:B does not equal C. by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      Swear words are separated from their less offensive brethren by connotation and social norms. According to my aunt overseas, the word 'bugger' is more obscene in the UK than it is in the US. Depending on the culture, different gestures can be incredibly offensive or common courtesy, the 'thumbs-up' being the easiest example to think of. Shit is more offensive than crap is more offensive than poo because that's how the social norms go. Across individual families, the values may be different. One of my friends was brought up in a family where 'crap' was put on the same level as 'shit,' as far as obscenities go. Same family had no issues with the word 'piss,' which my family dislikes.

      I personally tend to shy away from using 'foul' language as much as possible, especially avoiding its utility in insulting people, because I love the rich variety of the English language, and hate to tie myself down to this small subset. Also, it brings me great pleasure to be able to insult someone's intelligence when they ask me to explain the insult I just cast at them.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    4. Re:B does not equal C. by ifrag · · Score: 1

      That's the dumbest argument I've heard all day, and I've just come from the WoW forums.

      That right there is the most insulting thing I've seen in a long while, and the sentence doesn't even have any curse words in it!

      --
      Fear is the mind killer.
    5. Re:B does not equal C. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Shit is more offensive than crap is more offensive than poo because that's how the social norms go.

      I have been asking for a rational reason for why some words are 'obscenities'. This is not one. This is a tautology. It's bad because it is bad. This is not a good reason.

    6. Re:B does not equal C. by SevenDigitUID · · Score: 1

      I have been asking for a rational reason for why some words are 'obscenities'. This is not one. This is a tautology. It's bad because it is bad. This is not a good reason.

      What does it matter why? Why do we call a dog a dog? Why do we call a cat a cat?

      What do you hope to learn, change, discuss, discover, or do if you find out why each and every swear word became categorized as such? What difference does it make?

      Lets take "Bitch" as an arbitray example. It used to be used only to describe a female dog. It began to be used to compare women to dogs in heat, an unfavorable comparison implying that the women has no virtue or self control, and that she is worth only enough to be compared to a "lesser" animal. Eventaully some of that meaning is lost, and over time becomes a negative word you can call a woman just to be mean. ::Source:: My imagination, but its probably close to reality, in several languages.

      So, there's a possible explaination for one word. How does that factor in to your worldview? Does a bit of historical perspecitive in the negative use of the word change your mind on anything? Does it enlighten you? Do you take that as a better answer than "Its only bad because the abstract notion of "society" says its bad"?
    7. Re:B does not equal C. by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      That's true, but requires you to first assume that society as a whole is rational. If you want a reason, it's going to be inertia. This word is bad because my father taught me it's bad. You looked at that as mere learned behavior, but it's actually more than that. It's tradition, in a way. My father taught me this word is bad because he believed it, because he learned that from his father. This is the same way prejudices and stereotypes are passed on. Do you ask why there's the racist notion among some people that black people are less than white people in some way? It's the same reason, learned behavior passed through generations. If you go far enough back, you find that black people used to be used as slaves in America, and that's where the inherent thought that they were less human came from. I'm sure that if we could go far enough back, some guy just needed a word to describe something in foul terms, and that 'bad' word has been passed down, keeping its vulgarity all the way.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    8. Re:B does not equal C. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I don't think laws based off "my father said it was bad because his father said it was bad because his father said it was bad" are good for society. Neither laws nor 'regulations' which carry the force of law. Perhaps, since it's a societal taboo, we let society and not government thugs take care of it.

    9. Re:B does not equal C. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I want to know because we fine people over language. I believe laws should be based in reason. I feel the same way about other 'societal convention' laws like the War Against Some Drugs and the illegality of prostitution. Now, I don't use a lot of 'profanity', I don't use drugs (except legal ones like caffeine, nicotine, perscription and OTC meds, refined sugar, and the big bad grandaddy of them all, alcohol) and I have never and will never go to a prostitute. However, I also don't want to see laws based on societal conventions that don't have reasoned explanations behind them. You know, that whole cliche about "I wasn't an X so when they came for X I said nothing" kind of thing.

    10. Re:B does not equal C. by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      The only real laws I can think of in this country about obscenity are Disturbing the Peace, and whatever the FCC uses to fine people who break the rules. Disturbing the Peace -is- a societal thing, where government only provides the punishment, someone else has to provide the offended citizen. I suppose laws regarding nudity count too.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    11. Re:B does not equal C. by SevenDigitUID · · Score: 1

      Ah, see there's the disconnect. You have to be able to seperate discussions about law and discussions about culture. The original topic is about online gaming culture, not laws. If we had been talking about law (maybe you mentioned it in another post and I just missed it) I'd have been much more likely to be on your side of the discussion (although with a different approach).

      I appreciate the back and forth with you today, Cheers.

    12. Re:B does not equal C. by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      I wish we could seperate cultural factors from laws :) Have a good one.

  54. No railing for Thunder Bluff? by codeonezero · · Score: 1

    For a second I thought this article was going to be about improving child safety around Thunder Bluff. As it has been observed the reason you don't see many Tauren children around is because they all keep falling off Thunder Bluff to their deaths. More railing around Thunder Bluff would alleviate this serious World of Warcraft issue.

    I think maybe the article would have made better use of an appropriate game reference...like "Cleaning up the The Barrens".

    Nobody hangs around Thunder Bluff long enough to needing "clean up".

    --

    ....
    int main (void) { ... }

  55. Now really... by eviltypeguy · · Score: 1

    We can't help it if our older population doesn't drop their bovine excrement where it belongs.

    As Taurens get older, they lose control.

    How silly would a Tauren wearing a diaper look?

    1. Re:Now really... by geekoid · · Score: 1


      As Taurens get older, they lose control.

      espcially when they laugh. Milk just sprays everywhere.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  56. Re:Colleen by rootofevil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    i believe this is utterly appropriate at this time.

    --
    turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  57. There are special servers, they're called 'RP' by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

    In practice, I've found that the best way to minimize the amount of 'negative energy' that you encounter in-game is to simply roll your character on a role play server. All of the teenie-boppers and frat boys who seem to live to spew bile and idiocy avoid these servers like the plague*. People are more polite and more helpful -- even the teenagers. Overall it's a night-and-day experience. The best part? Unless you're in an RP guild, nobody really cares if you role-play or not!

    It's not completely devoid of idiots, and no they generally will not be banned from the server for being idiots. However the greatly reduced volume makes /ignore a much more reasonable tool, and you just won't run into them as much. Even Barrens chat is mostly tolerable, if you can believe that. Highly recommended.

    * I guess the theory is that in order to not feel like the giant dorks that they are for playing WoW they need to find an ever bigger dork to feel superior to. Whatever keeps them away, I say.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
    1. Re:There are special servers, they're called 'RP' by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip.

      But are there equivalents for non-RPGs?

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    2. Re:There are special servers, they're called 'RP' by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Not that I know of. You'd have to find some way to distinguish them based on dorkiness, since we're really relying on self-selection here.

      The thought of an RP server for counterstrike amuses me. You know, where people really -get into- their character and name them and everything, and they could have little parties, and parlay with the enemy before they start fighting. It would be awesome.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  58. Oh please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Grow some balls, woman.

  59. RIP: Civility in Games by Darlantan · · Score: 1

    Newsflash: Civility on the 'net in games died in the mid 90's. Once the "user-friendly" bar reached a certain point where any dumb schmuck could play, dumb schmucks started playing. There were asshats before, sure, but the ratios were way different.

    As for stopping profanity...well, good luck with that. Your only hope is to mask it from delicate eyes on your end, because humans have this thing about swearing to express strong emotions of certain types.

    --
    Fill in your four or five-letter word of wisdom here _ _ _ _ _.
  60. One solution... by Toonol · · Score: 1

    ...That will work, but nobody will like. Dispense with anonymity, use people's full names. The most civil forum I post on uses this rule.

  61. Object Lesson by not_hylas(+) · · Score: 1

    From an Internet long, long ago ...

    Chapter One of Julian Dibbell's My Tiny Life, 1998.
    (First published in somewhat different form in The Village Voice, December 1993.)

    Call me Dr. Bombay.
    Mr. Bungle was a problem.

    "They say he raped them that night. They say he did it with a cunning little doll, fashioned in their image and imbued with the power to make them do whatever he desired. They say that by manipulating the doll he forced them to have sex with him, and with each other, and to do horrible, brutal things to their own bodies. And though I wasn't there that night, I think I can assure you that what they say is true, because it all happened right in the living room -- right there amid the well-stocked bookcases and the sofas and the fireplace -- of a house I came later to think of as my second home."

    It's an object lesson.
    If they start "meowing", well, it's time to leave.

    http://gandalf.home.digital.net/trollfaq.html

    --
    ~hylas
  62. The U.S. Army solution by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    America's Army still has the best solution. Their in-game implementation of the United States Army Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth. They just put griefers in a barred cell from which there is no escape, and keep them there for a while. There's nothing to do in the cell, except peer out the little barred window and watch the sun go down.

    1. Re:The U.S. Army solution by Phrogman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And thats the best way to do it I think. These are roleplaying games, so institute instanced prison cells, and stick the offending people in them. Vary the amount of time based on the offense, and with a few strikes you are out (ie the company deletes your account and all characters, thanks for playing). People will smarten up really quick.

      Example:
      Offensive Language/Behaviour - your toon is locked in prison for X number of hours. 2nd Offense, its X *days*. Plus you get fined say 20% of your current bank account.

      Racist Language/Harassment - your toon is locked in prison for X number of days, lose all current in game bank account.

      Buying in game credits from a Credit spammer - Delete the entire account.

      I think it would work well overall.

      I think in Pirates of the Burning Sea they are planning on Hanging offending griefer types publically. I hope they do it, even if it encourages people to get hung, at least it will publically demonstrate that something is being done. I think in game pillories would be excellent as well. Spending the next 2 hours you are logged in with people abusing your toon in a public market might be annoying enough.

      Sure, in RL this stuff doesn't work that well, but in game I think it might work quite well.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    2. Re:The U.S. Army solution by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      This may all look great on paper, but in fact it's absurd and totalitarian.

      Is this a realistic penalty in real life? "Offensive Language/Behaviour - You are locked in prison for X number of hours. 2nd Offense, its X *days*. Plus you get fined say 20% of your current bank account."

      It's basically imprisoning and fining someone for saying something that is subjectively deemed to be "offensive" -- in short, it's censorship, and you propose to maintain it with force.

      While I don't have any objections to this sort of disciplinary action for people who are legitimately harassing other players or exploiting the game (I actually think this would be a great system to penalize player killing in an MMO which allowed it, the "cops & robbers" roleplaying that would develop would be pretty entertaining); but I also feel that people in a public forum do not have the "right to be unoffended" and that a policy that penalized players for uttering 'fuck' or 'nigger' in chat, regardless of context, would stifle people's expression and make them feel uncomfortable in the game (which would of course have the side effect of reducing the subscription base, which is why we never have to worry about this sort of thing happening).

    3. Re:The U.S. Army solution by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      I don't think offensive messages are much of a problem in MMOs. It's so easy to just /ignore any asshat or spammer you come across in WoW. There actually isn't a whole lot of things you can do in WoW... I mean, things that could land you in prison for a while. There are serious offenses like buying gold and cheating, but those get your account banned.

    4. Re:The U.S. Army solution by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      There's nothing to do in the cell, except peer out the little barred window and watch the sun go down.

      That sounds fun. Is there a single player version of this "cell" game?

  63. Tseric just quit WoW by Jormundgard · · Score: 2, Informative

    Very relevant sidenote is that Tseric just quit his community moderator position after two years at Blizzard. He apparently got tired of the extremely bad treatment he received on a day-to-day basis.

    1. Re:Tseric just quit WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And its good that he's gone. He was an incompetent CM, and deserved the ridicule that was heaped upon him. His customer service technique was sorting through hundreds of posts, finding one that offended him, and whining about how nobody was "constructive".

    2. Re:Tseric just quit WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10 to 1 odds you play a shaman.

  64. Re:Object Lesson | LINK by not_hylas(+) · · Score: 1

    A Rape in Cyberspace
    (Or TINYSOCIETY, and How to Make One)
    Chapter One of Julian Dibbell's My Tiny Life, 1998

    http://www.juliandibbell.com/texts/bungle.html

    --
    ~hylas
  65. What a total spazz of an article by sasha787 · · Score: 1

    What a total spazz of an article. Kids will be kids, as much as we all hate the "Lolz" and random racist comments, it is no ones job to nanny/moderate/ or block that content. Most devs have already included some kind of /ignore feature, or means of reporting that person to a GM. Thats as much as should be done. This "gamers unite, lets hold hands and eradicate the bad stuff" is so pathetic. Relax, go smoke a bowl and game.

  66. taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Lord+Ender · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know whether it is cultural or instinctual, but when boys compete, they "trash-talk" eachother. It is the competitive spirit of the game bleeding into language.

    Think about a street basketball game and the "yo momma's so fat" jokes. The same thing happens in online FPS games.

    Players tend to build up an immunity to such insults, so there is an arms race of conceiving increasingly offensive verbal jabs. It gets worse and worse.

    The solution, of course, is to just ignore offensive words altogether. Think "sticks and stones" and get on with the game! Racism in online games is a joke anyway--nobody knows your race so they can't mean it seriously. There is nothing special or magical about taboo words, either. Hearing "swear" words only hurts your feelings because you let them. You have nobody to blame but yourself.

    If you can't handle trash talk in competitive games, whether they are on the court or on the net, you can either stop playing or stop giving taboo words power over you.

    Alternatively, start a girls league or have referees which enforce a code of good sportsmanship. Pick-up games of basketball and of counter-strike don't have refs, so you will always have boys' competitive spirits showing in the language.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    1. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope to God you're never picked for jury duty on a rape case. Harrassment (verbal or otherwise) is always the harassers fault, no matter what the target may have done to inspire harassment. I agree that trash talk is a normal part of online play, and I don't want to ruin anyones harmless fun. But if its really all in play, someone who is really offended would be met with a quick apology and a change of subject. Most of the time, that person becomes a target for abuse, which says to me that it isn't all in good fun, and nobody has an obligation to "play along."

    2. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by i8-p · · Score: 1

      Substitute "piss-ant kid" for "boy", and "adult" for "girl", and you might better understand the issue. I have a thick skin and am not offended by swear words, but would still love to avoid the incessant whiny, assinine commentary on online games. It reduces my enjoyment of online games, or forces me to disable features that were intended to improve my experience.

      I don't find racism funny, despite your assertion that it's a "joke". Neither do I find the misogyny enbedded in your post to be clever or entertaining in the least. It makes for an online gaming community that alienates a large portion of its potential audience. It seems to me that the publishers have a financial incentive here to increase their appeal.

      The reason free speech works is that it typically comes at the price of accountability. Say some thing offensive in a crowded room, and you are personally accountable to the other people in the room. Write an anonymous article, and the publisher of the paper will be held accountable. The paper's editor, knowing this, will not publish something offensive unless he sees value worth the price he will pay from his angry readers cancelled subscriptions. Currently, if we are offended by what we hear in a game, we have limited options to hold the actual author of those statements accountable. Enough people have to quit the games (or not subscribe in the first place) to make the development of tools to increase accountability within the game worth their cost.

    3. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by aafiske · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The difference is, in a basketball if someone mouths off nonstop for 15 minutes about how you are a giant fag for stealing the ball and getting two points, you can go break their nose. The implied threat of such an action generally keeps the taunting and trash-talking on a level that is feather-ruffling, and insulting if you are thin-skinned, but not 'fighting words'.

      Online, there are no 'fighting words'. There is no barrier, no repercussions for actions, no tarnishing of your actual name by your behavior in game.

      Saying 'it's just trash talk, it's your own fault for caring' misses the point.

    4. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Lord+Ender · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I hope to God you're never picked for jury duty on a rape case. Harrassment (verbal or otherwise) is always the harassers fault, no matter what the target may have done to inspire harassment.
      I hope to God you're never involved in a game of street basketball. What does harassment have to do with rape? Rape is a violent crime, harassment is not. They are totally different.

      Also, harassment is certainly not always the harasser's fault. It's subjective. One person's insult is another person's friendly jab. I can't control how you interpret everything I say.

      I don't know why I should waste my time talking to an AC, though.
      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    5. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are fixin to get yourself in a heap of trouble with your faulty knowledge of harassment legal standards. I hope your employer has liability insurance.

      And next time you're playing street basketball in a mixed crowd, try using an innocent "taboo-word" like the "N-word" in an insult and see what happens. I hope you have medical insurance. :-)

      Anyway, I don't know why I'm wasting my time posting on games.slashdot.org but I though I would clear up these factual errors.

    6. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Substitute "piss-ant kid" for "boy", and "adult" for "girl", and you might better understand the issue.
      Wrong. Adult men trash talk in competitions. I have rarely observed this in women of any age.

      I don't find racism funny, despite your assertion that it's a "joke".
      Richard Prior, Carlos Mencia, and countless other comedians make careers of racist jokes. But you missed my point: online racism can't possibly be sincere because nobody knows anybody else's race.

      the misogyny enbedded[sic] in your post
      Misogyny? I was pointing out the observable evidence that boys trash talk in competition much more than girls do. If anything, that is a compliment to girls. It is not sexist to state the difference between sexes. It is a fact that the average IQ of men is higher than the average IQ of women. It isn't sexist to say that. Thin-skinned people, regardless of sex, don't get much respect from me.

      Currently, if we are offended by what we hear in a game, we have limited options to hold the actual author of those statements accountable.
      Most games have "ignore player" and "mute player" options. Many also have "initiate kick vote against player." That is somewhat similar to what happens in real life. Getting banned from a server for saying offensive things is like getting kicked out of a frat for saying offensive things.
      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    7. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      I don't think my office can be sued for anything I say on a basketball court on my own time. You might want to brush up on your knowledge of law.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    8. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      Were it that everyone like you, thick-skinned and determined to play despite the "trash-talk" spewed at you by your opponent! But even then, I doubt that people would let slide threats to their lives or their loved ones, even on the street court-- you would have a fistfight before you know it.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    9. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by SevenDigitUID · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He's not comparing rape to basketball, he's appalled by the ease with which you blame the victim.

      You are absolutely right that you cannont control how everyone will interpret what you say, but in online games a general sense of courtesy is missing. The lowest common denominator should be polite respect, even if that means that a few funny jokes are never told.

    10. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      There is no barrier, no repercussions for actions, no tarnishing of your actual name by your behavior in game.
      In lots of games players can be muted, kicked, or banned based on either votes or administrator decisions. That is a repercussion. It may not work this way for MMORPGs.
      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    11. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by geekoid · · Score: 1

      no name calling ever warrants violence.

      Put them on your ignoe list. Enough people do that and noone will play with them. Which is exactly what really happens if someone spends 15 minutes talking about Chuck norris in real life.

      It just occured to me:
      Chuck Norris's beard is AMAZ *head explodes*

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    12. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by jslater25 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Somehow your comment "because you let them" makes me think you are the type person who would blame the victim for getting raped.

    13. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Somehow you are wrong.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    14. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by Creepy · · Score: 1

      I learned in Jr High School that running doesn't help, they'll just double their effort the more they know it bugs you. I've found it much more effective to play along with them, then tease them in character. Teasing a male about his manhood works well - "Kurzak Deathslayer, honey, pray for Viagra," "Kurzak Deathslayer, baby, I don't know how to say this, but I've seen twigs with more wood" or either male or female with jokes about VDs work well - "Damn Kalara Starsong, would you stop all that sucking? It burns enough when I pee as it is."

          Try to avoid joking about "serious" issues like anorexia, though (I got in trouble for one of those) and name names whenever possible so everyone knows exactly who you are teasing.

    15. Re:taboo words, racism, and trash talk by i8-p · · Score: 1

      I'm not misogynist, I have family members that are women. You can make your excuses, but you're making a big deal about something as inconsequential as a difference in a subjective, possibly gender-biased measure. I'm just calling them like I seem them.

      Anyone who uses ethnic or racial slurs in an online community knows that people of that race or ethnicity are out there, and knows they will be offended. That they do it anyway just means that they are punks who are hiding behind their anonymity in voicing their disrespect.

      The crux of your argument seems to be that a server is like a frat. The problem is, not everyone wants to play in a frat, and there are only mediocre options (like the "ignore player" option you cite) available to those who would prefer to play in a different atmosphere. Publishers of these games will need to make more extensive options available, be they longer ignore lists or servers on which different codes of conduct are enforced, if they want to capture that segment of the market.

  67. This the Reality of ANY Pick Up Game by PM+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did anyone play pick up basketball games at their local playground growing up? Racist, sexist, homophobic, profane... you name it! It was called smack talk and some people were incredible at it. This is the modern day equivalent. If you are a 30-year gamer with a job (like me) and you go into a game filled with teenagers... guess what? Smack talk. It's no different than heading to your local basketball court and trying to hang with the teenagers there.

    1. Re:This the Reality of ANY Pick Up Game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, ordinarily, you're not paying for time on the local court.

    2. Re:This the Reality of ANY Pick Up Game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. Cross the line at a pickup game and you'll get real lonely real quick. You do it online because you can't do it in real life.

    3. Re:This the Reality of ANY Pick Up Game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other two ACs made a couple decent points I was going to, but here's a third: that kind of thing is cultural. It's only prevalent because it's accepted. If you time-traveled back to the 1970s, you'd be surprised at how less vulgar that basketball court was. "Smack talk" as it's now known began in the late 70's and spread through the 80's. Prior to that, you'd get a few "you suck"s and maybe a "is that all you got?" but the pros generally weren't making insinuations about each other's mothers and their sexual proclivities, and so you didn't hear that stuff very often on the court. Somebody who said some of the shit you hear today would have gotten his ass beat back then.
        The point is, stuff like this is all about societal boundaries, and where they're set. Online games have very poor boundary mechanisms, and people simply accept this kind of stuff. If the latter changes, the former might as well.

    4. Re:This the Reality of ANY Pick Up Game by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      In addition to what the others have already replied, there's a huge difference between trash talking and taunting and just sitting in general chat being an ass.

      I /taunt /laugh and /spit my opponents in battlegrounds all the time -- it's gamesmanship. It gets under their skin and they don't play as well. They start gunning for me and playing recklessly. It works out in my team's favor and helps us win.

      General chat spam isn't gamesmanship. It's just a bunch of stupid kids being stupid.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
  68. Re:One solution: An 'asshole' button. by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

    This is not abuse-proof.What if griefers create throwaway characters,just to accumulate those points and spend them.

  69. Re:Just leave general chat - Duh! by y86 · · Score: 0

    You'll get this anywhere, stick with your friends in a channel...just like you stick with your friends in a bar. How often do you go to a bar and find a Jerk? This isn't a video game only problem.

  70. This is rediculous by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    I've been in many a chat over my Internet career -- I've been around since the beginning. It is my understanding that the entire purpose for most of these games is to celebrate freedom -- in a world without restrictions. To impose those restrictions -- moreso to mandate them -- is just retarded (in the proper sense of the word).

    Many seem to complain that the majority of people are offensive -- I use the word "offensive" instead of "assault" because my term anchors on the complainer without judging the accused. Welcome to word choice. "Objectionable" would also have worked -- perhaps even better.

    If your complaint is regarding the "majority" then you're just an idiot trying to ruin someone else's fun. No one is being hurt against his/her will. You can leave at any time, and you are not forced to return -- you weren't forced to arrive in the first place.

    So I leave you with this additional point. Where would you suggest that a person go to act out an otherwise unacceptable desire? It seems to be that killing cows is the choice for a would-be serial killer, and that hand-drawing child pornography is the acceptable version of photographing actual children. So what of the customer service call centre person? The guy who spends all day being nice to people on the telephone -- people who call for no reason but to yell at him for something that his company's client has done. If he wants to yell at someone, to where should he go?

    You're not going to eliminate the desire for evil. Most of us have the evolutionary urge to strangle a person with my bare hands. It's a fossil-feeling, but it's there -- like my tail-bone. There are, however, numerous outlets in modern civilization for any would-be killer. I'm quite confident that if we suddenly dropped violent video games, and violent movies, there'd be a wave of destruction and rampage.

    Same goes for verbal environments. What do you do all day that leaves you in such a perfectly content state? I can make a few educated guesses. Hmm, things that leave human beings perfectly content: abusing children, killing other people, and drugs. Personally, I do none of those things. So I have some energy left to be upset with people that I find dissappointing. And this, right here, is a wonderful way to focus that energy before I get back to work. Yesterday, I killed a dozen friends -- with lasers, cannons, fire, and this weird purple stuff, multiple times each as I captured a flag and taunted them with cheesy movie quotes. Yeah, I got killed a hell-of-a-lot of times too.

  71. Ignore him? by alexgieg · · Score: 1

    World of Warcraft has an "Ignore Player" feature for a reason. You ignore him, you'll never, ever, read anything coming from him again.

    And for "physical" abuse (for example, entering a guild meeting and ruining the photo), one can open a ticket to a game master and have him deal with the annoying player. Not that this is much fast, but it's nevertheless available.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  72. Re:One solution: An 'asshole' button. by AntiNazi · · Score: 1

    Simple fix, probably meant by the poster. Account wide. Done. If you are willing to pay for a ton of accounts to grief people, then damn, I guess you can abuse it, but at $15/month I doubt you will really see that.

  73. Civil Censorship by saintory · · Score: 1

    Personally, I think being censored by your peers is a lot worse than having a watchdog do it. We all play because we enjoy it and just because there's an unwelcome element shouldn't prevent us from continuing to play. I've read through the posts and there are some ideas I really like.

    • Give warnings - Nearly all IM clients have this, where you can warn a person. Institute an option to "warn" a person, making them accountable for their actions. Don't make it a public view offense, i.e. don't allow users to see that someone has been warned and by how much. If you give everyone 2% warning ability per person per long time period, chances are that if the person being warned is really being offensive then they'll hit 100% pretty quickly. Set a threshold for how much they can write and a higher one for being flagged to a GM.
    • Turn your profanity filter on - Mine is off because I like to see what people are actually using for their choice swear words, but this is on by default and usually replaces a word with $*!# symbols.
    • Get out of chat rooms - If you don't like the chat in General or never want to trade on Trade, get off these channels. They're on by default because they can really help a noob as much as help a veteran.
    • Report spammers - I like that in upcoming WoW 2.1 I'll be able to report a tell directly to the game makers.
    • Track 10-day Trial codes - You can either get them from the retail box or can get them online. Whatever the case, you can track where they came from and almost where they went to. For the retail box, if a key is associated with a real key, shut them both off. Make them pay for it, literally. As for the free download code, track the IP or something a little more identifiable that is the same as when they finally use it. Shut them down, maybe temporarily (10 days) so they have to do more than just downlaod another code.

    These could easily be implemented and would give the world some self regulation (empowerment?). This would also make it easier for the game makers than to setup a rudeness police.

  74. It's called accountability. by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

    You see, *I* play (and in fact, am a member of the clan that runs it) Day of Defeat:Source on a server where there are these things called "rules". And people who do not play by these "rules" get banned according to their Steam ID. Seeing as someone in the clan is almost invariably on the server at least 20 hours a day (and some offences can be enforced automatically by the server), this keeps behaviour remarkably civil. People don't spew unending streams of obscenities and hate speech into their mics. They don't grief. They don't spam.

    There's really only a few people that do this. Once they're gone for good, the problem goes away. Other people learn that it's not acceptable to grief even if they're having a bad day, and they stop. Or they just don't bother coming back to the server, in which case everyone wins.

    --
    "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
  75. No by dharbee · · Score: 1

    "To say that being offended by foul language is a learned behavior is obviously the case, but you present it as though only childish people would let a learned behavior influence them. The statement "Those words upset me cause mommy and daddy told me they should." is obviously meant to belittle people who have learned that offensive language is offensive."

    You learn not to curse from your mommy and daddy. You're reading something into it far beyond what he actually said, and that makes me wonder why.

    "What purpose does the word fuck have in the English language other than to be offensive?"

    Emphasis. Exclamation. If I stub my toe and no one else is around, when I yell "FUCK!" who is offended?

    "Is it so unreasonable that someone gets offended by an offensive word?"

    And there you admit the fatal flaw in your argument. Words don't offend, people ALLOW themselves to be offended by words. It is not the word, but the individual who ultimately decides if a word is offensive.

    "Also for all those who get upset that crap isn't obscene while shit is."

    My grandmother would vehemently disagree. Which proves my point quite nicely, while refuting yours as well.

    Now go F yourself you F-ing C-sucking piece of dog S. (nothing offensive there, so no getting offended by you, your rules not mine)

  76. Grow thicker skin! by DoctaWatson · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Come on. It seems like everyone is posting "solutions" to the problem that recommend banning bad language or punishing offensive users. Am I really going to be the only person to say that maybe the author needs to grow thicker skin and not let these things get to her so much?

    Are we really so easily offended by people playing a game?

    1. Re:Grow thicker skin! by Miniluv · · Score: 1

      There are two issues in TFA. One of them is language, and I think referring to WoW is really disingenuous because it comes with a built in profanity filter which is surprisingly effective and its turned on by default.

      Griefing, on the other hand, is a genuine problem. I can /ignore you, or just manually ignore you, but there are some actions you can take which I cannot do anything about. Be it tagging the named mob I need for a quest on a PVE server or ganking me on a PvP server either way you can put a serious crimp in my ability to enjoy the game. Were you to do the equivalent on the oft-mentioned basketball court you'd be doing something like knifing my basketball. Try that one in any urban environment and see how well it goes over.

      I do think TFA is a bit whiny and overblown, particularly in the complaints about foul language. However people need to start asking themselves why we tolerate behavior online that we wouldn't tolerate in real life. Even more importantly, if we WOULD tolerate calling each other these names in a spiteful way in real life, WHY would we tolerate it? I think this is even more applicable with ganking on PvP servers, we need to stop perpetuating the belief that this is "cool" or "leet" or "uber" in any way. Guild leaders and officers should start caring about the rep of their guild and /gkick those people.

      We should also encourage each other to use any of the interoperable player rating addons to let the "wisdom of crowds" start to filter the wheat from the chaff. If you behavior begins to ostracize you, the way it does in real life, then the behavior will change.

    2. Re:Grow thicker skin! by petrus4 · · Score: 1

      There are two issues in TFA. One of them is language, and I think referring to WoW is really disingenuous because it comes with a built in profanity filter which is surprisingly effective and its turned on by default.

      As I've already written, WoW's single main problem is terminal elitism. Profanity isn't something that I anyway have ever considered a problem.

  77. oh please by Travoltus · · Score: 1

    Try that at my workplace.

    I'll see you out the door, with cause.

    Attitudes like yours routinely cause employers crippling lawsuits that get decided against them, because society is now highly intolerant of that crap.

    Just ask Don Imus.

    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
    1. Re:oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Attitudes like yours routinely cause employers crippling lawsuits that get decided against them, because society is highly intolerant Fixed that for you.
  78. twisted by Jenovaside · · Score: 1

    Yes, you can expect this from any online game. Stoping it altogether is 10X harder then stopping piracy, its not going to happen. What we needs is explicit groups like xbox live, and upon report of abusing the family section , just force them to only play in "underground", unless they pettition otherwise. oh and about in game verbal assault; type "/ignore name", now if only it were that simple irl.

  79. Why do idiots like you have to show your stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "if poo = shit then we wouldn't have two different words for it."

    That's just fucking moronic. Seriously, if you think you made a point here, punch yourself in the nuts for being such a god damned retard.

  80. Re:Colleen by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

    Ha! I don't even have to look, I know the exact strip. I was trying to remember the equation when I was typing: Normal Person + Internet = Total Asshat...Or something like that.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  81. Get a thicker skin by brkello · · Score: 0, Redundant

    And I mean that to people on general. With the over-reaction we are getting to shock jocks on the radio...to the morons who say things in games...the easiest thing to do is just let it go. You aren't going to change them. Most games give you mechanisms to ignore the most obnoxious. Otherwise...just relax and try to see the humor. Yeah, to some people the guild name "A Naga Stole My Bicycle" is offensive. But it is meant in humor and should be interpreted as such. People are too sensitive about words lately. In general, most people aren't racist...these words have become slang to mean something else. I think people should watch what they say more and others shouldn't be so sensitive. But it isn't a problem that is going to go away. So either learn to deal with it or log off.

    --
    Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
  82. Filtering Fun by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 2, Interesting
    We once ran a small chat and gaming system where I worked. It had a general chat channel, and when people paired up to play a game, such as chess or checkers, it would make a private channel for them.

    Because this was a family service, we had to try to police conduct in the general channel, and because we didn't have the staff to monitor it live 24/7, it fell to me to try to automate some of this. That actually worked fairly well. We had a very large dictionary of naughty words and phrases. When you said something, my filters basically looked for any of those things, and '*'ed them out. The filter ignored whitespace, and it also considered certain characters to be equivalent, so if you wrote 5h17, that would match 'shit', since it knew a 5 could take the place of an s, and so on. However, before filtering, it did a spell check on your text, and marked all the words that were spelled right and were not on the bad word list as safe. For example, if you said "wash it", it would not see the "sh it" as something bad.

    This worked surprisingly well. It caught it when people tried tricks like inserting spaces to break up the bad words, but usually did not get false positives, because of the spell check protector stuff. Well, unless you were a lousy speller, but if a lousy speller got kicked off incorrectly for profanity, it still improved things. :-)

    One other little trick it did. When it filtered out something in your message, it only did that on the message sent to other people. The copy that echoed back to your system was uncensored.

    When you got caught, it would send you a message warning you to watch your language. If you ignored the warning, an admin bot would ban you for a period of time. Repeared bans would be for longer times.

    One thing that disappointed me: no one ever tried to use Klingon profanity to get around the filters. I had that covered in the filters, and was hoping to see the reaction when the users discovered that.

    1. Re:Filtering Fun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that sofa king we todd ed.

  83. teh cow says by stonedcat · · Score: 0

    For the whored!

    --
    You can't take the sky from me.
  84. Slashdotted by hf256 · · Score: 1

    Site referenced in TFA appears to be slashdotted.

  85. What a carebear by TrashGUY · · Score: 0

    /grief

  86. Words Can Be Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at our 1st amendment and why its so important if you don't believe they have strength.

    As far as MMOs go, there are steps you can take like ignoring trolls and general chats, but there will always be intolerance. This is because the games have become a social setting massive enough to group together a demographic that incorporates some anti-social types that have the need to hate.

    If you think its just happening in general chat or harrassment by some person with a carefully chosen name to offend that gets past the software filters then count yourself lucky.

    I now belong to online tolerance advocacy groups (does it matter what kind of tolerance we're advocating?), and you'd be surprised at some of the crap we've seen. Most of the death threats are just email or game mail jokes. Some are more serious.

    In a particular case a player was hounded by guildies and other high level friends for accidentally slipping up in TS and mentioning some information about their real life identity while waiting during a boring raid on MC. The guild leaders have some prejudice and the person ends up alienated, ridiculed and kicked out of the guild. On a competative server in a high-end guild the rumors fly and the player ends up some kind of outcast. Ok, that sucks you're a top level rogue with the best gear and weapons and can't get into any other guilds or get a name change so you move to another server.

    Meanwhile the guild has its own website/message board, someone in guild management hacks the person's private email and starts the hate/death threats there too. The third party website has lousy security.

    Getting a death threat with a mapquest map from some weirdo on the internet that has a highlighted path from his house to your house, plus a picture of his gun collection and a message "I will erase you because your kind shouldn't be in the gene pool" is not something you expect from playing a game. Yeah its hopefully worst scenario, but it happens. In fact it happened to me which is why I'm posting anonymously like a coward. I don't like having to move into a friend's basement until the guy is in custody.

    In hindsight, the best defense is to keep everything about yourself completely private, avoid the guild websites? Yet in a game like WoW, to reach the high end bosses you have to play with a group that is organized and that tends to require a guild. WoW didn't have any way to provide the organization for guilds within its game, so most guilds had third-party sites to handle management.

    The OP is right, its a real issue. If WoW can't unstick you from bugs, do you really think they can understand let alone handle hate/intolerance?

    -some anonymous gamer girl with unipolar depression that mentioned to a guild buddy who's gf had just tried to kill herself that she had depression and would listen if he needed a friend

  87. Chuck Norris by Khammurabi · · Score: 1

    I think you mean Barrens General.
    Shhhh! The last thing we need is someone to start bringing up Chuck Norris comments or phrases with "murloc" in them. ... oh no ... Dang it!
    1. Re:Chuck Norris by Vanye1 · · Score: 1

      You'er on Thrall, too? Or is it someting pandemic to WoW?

  88. Emotes by Khammurabi · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, there's no way to punch someone in the face over the net.

    /punch

    Oh, you meant actual physical contact. They'd enable that feature, but they're too scared it'll turn X-rated within seconds.
  89. Re:Colleen by geekoid · · Score: 1

    "The people who wish the internet was a sweet world of marshmallow fluff ..."

    That's not what it's about.

    It's like a private clucb. You pay your dues every month to go whenever you want.
    Some other member start verbally harrassing you, you tell the owner you don't like it.
    The owner can ask the person to be quite, ask the person to leave, tell the complainer to too bad.

    This person is asking the owner to do something about the people down in fromt.

    Just like you would if a bunch of people started yelling about Chuck Norris while you were trying to watch a movie in a cinema...unless it was Spiderman 3, in which case you would thank them.

    Cryderman, Cry dear man,
    everyone cries just like a baby can.

    WATCHOUT it's cryderman,
    hey cry dear man!

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  90. Or by geekoid · · Score: 1

    go to the managemen and say:
    "I don't like that behaviour, can you stop it please?"

    Then if they don't, leave.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Or by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      No, you don't have more rights than I do. If the Management isn't doing anything about it, go do something else.

      You're the same brand of asshole who got smoking banned in BARS.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  91. One word. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reported.

  92. don't game with people you don't know IRL by teh_chrizzle · · Score: 1

    when i played asheron's call i discovered that people who play MMO's and don't know me in real life are either jerks, wankers, or mentally retarded. even my guild was more than 50% asshats.

    now i play lord of the rings online and city of heroes now, and while i have to turn of all chat channels but my kinship/supergroup, fellowship/team, friends and tells, i have to say that the level of asshattery has reduced significantly.

    instanced event areas are a great invention. in AC if you entered a dungeon there was a good chance (especially in a choice hunting spot) that someone would already be there. they would invite you to a fellowship with a bunch of people who where obviously PLing squeakers and when you declined to join them they would get angry that you were hogging the lewtz. having a quest/mission where i can enter a "dungeon" that belongs soley to me and my friends is a real boon the the MMO experience.

    if I /ignore a player, I want the option to ignore the WHOLE account

    the global ignore was also a good invention, where you can ignore the human and all of it's iterations, rather than his current instance on a specific server. COH has such an ignore.

    --
    sarcasm:
    -noun
    1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
  93. Re: spamsentry by SEAL · · Score: 2, Informative

    Don't even bother reporting the spammers with spamsentry. Blizzard has already stated that they are overwhelmed by reports from that mod and their logging (apparently) isn't good enough to track the culprits - who usually fire off a barrage of spam and then delete the account.

    Better use of spamsentry is this: /spamsentry options ignorebylevel 2

    That'll ignore tells from all players below level 2. I have yet to see a spambot bother to level up a character. They may start doing that at some point, but by then, Blizzard's patch with the in-house spam controls will be available.

  94. Everybody's Different by Khammurabi · · Score: 1

    What a dumb article though. Really, how can anyone believe that they can clean up the chat rooms where people with anonymity reside. It just wont happen. It takes people years of online participation in one community or another to stop using LOL let along stop attacking people.

    A better question would be why that person believes that everyone else should conform to his or her view of reality and social norms? If I want to express myself in a certain way, what gives that person the right punish me? Or more importantly, why does that person's view of what's right and wrong hold more sway than mine?

    If that person doesn't like it, there are tools in place to make their experience more enjoyable via ignore and leaving channels altogether.
    1. Re:Everybody's Different by moore.dustin · · Score: 1

      I agree. I say deal with it. Such is life, you have to learn to deal with douchenozzles.

  95. It genuinely is getting bad by petrus4 · · Score: 1

    World of Warcraft's forums have always been as vicious as the fairly high level of censorship will allow, but they have been getting worse recently.

    There are five main areas where a chronic degree of player elitism, and other player attitude problems are (at least sociologically speaking) slowly destroying World of Warcraft.

    1) If you don't have at least one, and preferably multiple level 70 characters, you're not acknowledged as a player of the game at all, culturally speaking. You're not considered credible in the area of forming a guild, even if you only intend it to be informal or for low level members, or have someone else to mentor you.

    2) For those who don't know, every character class in the game has three talent or sub-discipline trees, where as players progress they can add points to specific talents within each sub-discipline tree, in order to gain bonuses or new abilities within that sub-discipline. There is an endemic attitude among end-game players that, at least in the case of some classes, only one (or at most two) of these three talent trees is in any way valid or legitimate. Players (such as myself) who create characters that specialise in the politically incorrect talent tree/s are vilified as ignorant, and told that they will not be accepted to participate in the supposedly all-important activity of end-game raiding. Peer pressure is used as a means of enforcing these biases.

    3) There is a mentality among level 70 players that end-game raiding is the only thing in the game that is worth doing; if you're not raiding yourself, you are not considered to be engaging in any other legitimate form of activity.

    4) There is an overwhelming tendency among players who are ignorant of the mechanics of their given character class, and who are performing poorly in the game, to enter the forums and attempt to complain to Blizzard employees that the character class in question is "broken" and needs to be "fixed" in the ways that they specify, rather than said players engaging in the requisite research/other effort necessary to learn how to be genuinely effective with their character class within the game environment. This is predictably more true in the case of hybrid classes such as the Hunter and Shaman than others, because in the case of these classes, their purpose within a multidisciplinary player group is not as immediately apparent as is the case of more single-purpose classes, such as the Warrior or Mage.

    5) As far as the playerbase is concerned, The Burning Crusade expansion has been an unmitigated disaster. Since the expansion's release, player emphasis has been almost purely on competition and rivalry, rather than earlier forms of camaraderie and positive interaction. People in the game are less likely to help each other now to a large degree; it's become a lot more about how far ahead of the other person you can get. Blizzard themselves are responsible for other extremely detrimental changes that occurred just prior to the release of the expansion, namely the almost complete destruction of the in-game UI customisation and scripting system, and the abolition of the earlier pvp ranking system, which had also created a scenario where players had a concrete incentive for wanting to win games within the pvp battlegrounds.

  96. This is How You Get Rid of Bad Behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You change the game!
    Make everyone killable. If you don't like something someone does, KILL THEM(in game of course).

    Games like Shadowbane(unknon to most people) had a system like this, if you messed up in the eye of the beholder, you were slaughtered. The righteous quickly outnumbered the few foul mouthed kids. The problem we see today, is in games like WoW, people are invulnerable online. This allows for abuse, and raging. Having everyone be killable has its downsides... but honestly, you can't outweigh the good of it.

  97. everyone has their panties in a wad about this so by WannaBeGeekGirl · · Score: 1

    a little humor break from off the mark

    --
    ~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
  98. Re:Options in WoW = Free Babysitting by Strixy · · Score: 1

    I flat out refuse to pay $30/mo to babysit. That is all you have suggested I do. It has turned from a "pay to play" to a "pay to babysit" scenario. I refuse. As much as I would like to play WoW - forget it. /ignore = babysit this little brat. /ban = babysit that little brat. /report = babysitting

    What is so hard to understand about that? I don't pay to babysit... I should get paid to do it.

    I spent 2 1/2 hours taking screen shots and writing up reports that took a week to be reviewed and in the end that player was sent a polite little letter asking them not to behave like that again.

    I played for about 5 hours a week - max - on a slow week.

    forget it. it's not worth it.

    Blizzard et al. will continue to cater to these foul mouthed brats because they pay. The rest of us don't/won't waste our time.

    If Blizzard did somehow clean up their servers for the rest of us they would have to kick those brats off and then where would they be? Trying to convince us to come back? I don't think so. It's stupid incarnate in there and far worse than a daycare...

    children babysitting children... because they refuse to pay for daycare staff.

    Why would Blizzard et al. even bother to try to clean it up when it's exactly those same idiots that they're making the money off of? Why should Blizzard pay staff to kick paying customers off of the servers? So they can loose money to loose more money? Once word got out that there were 'secret WoW police" wandering about handing out suspensions things might improve... but I doubt it.

    I would encourage everyone to vote with their feet and quit playing all together.

  99. Roleplay or Rude? by Pym · · Score: 1

    I don't know about widespread or anything, but I know on the Sony Star Wars Galaxies MMORPG (which I don't play anymore), I stopped taking advantage of the player bounties because, as a female player and character, I was harranged with some pretty foul and offensive language by my targets (we're not talking the b**** word, but the c*** word, which was hardly necessary). I'm not easily offended, but it's hardly Star Wars RP to use any of the insults, and hardly in the spirit of play to do so.

    In general, maybe people forget there's real humans on the other side, and do things they wouldn't dream of doing to people face to face. Not just in name calling and whatnot, but in general, the "that toon is controlled by a person and not the game" doesn't occur to a lot of people. *shrug*

  100. I'm sure you haven't played Phantasy Star Online.. by Banarak · · Score: 1

    or Universe for that matter. You know, the big "console mmorpg" that came out like 5 years ago and is still running strong?

    In all that time, I've seen *1* GM. During a valentines photo shoot contest, on Universe, on X360. Let me tell you, everything she said was ignored, everyone was cussing in front of her, she couldn't even block people from spamming the other 200 users in the lobbys screens.

    Games without GM's exist. I was addicted to this one for a long time. The game has had what, 10 bans, all of them being the one serious hacker or his friends he told too much too? (Broomop)

    Just to throw in, being a previous Ragnarok Online hacker, and knowing one of the GM's personally... they have about 5 that cover all of their servers. Other games take a much bigger role in this department, but you can't say there aren't games without any supervision. And the ones here usually play, and don't respond to calls!

  101. So what can we do to fix this problem? by DakkonFury · · Score: 1
    I'm not so sure that even the OP would like some of the potential "fixes" to this kind of problem. One fix and probably the most effective is to have chat hosts. Sound familiar? Who here actually enjoys hosted chatrooms like AOL had (or maybe even still has?) I'll tell you one thing, I do not. There's something to be said about freedom of speech, and those freedoms translate into the online world just as readily as they do IRL (In Real Life for those of you that aren't in the know.) I personally feel no soul-bleeding need to be babysat while I play a game that I use to relax and let loose. Now, that's not to say that I'm one of those immature imbeciles that constantly heckle people on their experience, color, national origin, sexual preference, etc., etc. I will say that I dislike that sort of chatter, it's entirely non-productive and shaming.

    But to argue the other side of things (and please do NOT read this the wrong way, this is merely an example) there is definitely precedent for the allowance of such behavior. For example, being a member of the KKK is not illegal. It is not illegal to hate people for any reason; that falls within the realms of freedom of speech as people are perfectly allowed to think whatever they want. It is their *actions* that can potentially fall under the legal umbrella, as hating someone is not illegal whereas performing a criminal act for those reasons is.

    With that out of the way, World of Warcraft's designers (to use an example) have implemented ways that every user can block out that sort of speech. Starting from the simplest to the more drastic measures, first there is the chat filter. This turns any "curse word" into a series of symbols such as $%^&*!! in order to censor certain terminology. Secondly, there is the /ignore feature, allowing you to simply filter out everything that is said by that person so it doesn't even appear. Lastly, and unfortunately this feature is hardly ever used enough, there is a way for you to report someone to the GMs for excessively vulgar language or verbal abuse/harassment.

    OP, I know you wish to have things in place beforehand to ensure a more civilized conversational experience, but I believe Blizzard (and possibly other game developers) has made the best choice, and that is to leave it up to the individual user. This ensures that Blizzard isn't stepping on anyone's constitutional rights, while giving us the power to custom-tailor our own gaming experience.

  102. Welcome to the internet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trash talk has been a part of online gaming forever. It's hardly getting worse then it has been since the beginning of online gaming. Don't let it get under your skin just ignore it. Thats the whole point of trash talking is to get under your skin. No need to get fucking Nazi about it and start banning people for speaking a certain way. I don't talk much trash(unless its just joking) because I think its lame. I mean I swear allot but who gives a fuck? Just let the 12-year olds have their fun and ignore them. Their only doing it for attention. i bet half the racist stuff you've read is from kids trying to shock people. I doubt they are actually racist.

  103. too bad. by dirtyshoes · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    freedom of speech. don't like it? move to north korea you red. i think its insulting to anyones intelligence to even begin to think that there should be some mass filtering of chat just because a couple of moms couldnt take their kids saying a couple of explicits. just because you can't tolerate it doesn't mean the rest of us want to cover our ears. i hate the average twelve year old on counterstrike as much as the next guy, but just because they have a vocabulary that covers all three and four letter words doesn't have an impact on me as a person or for that matter my gaming expierence. As its all a part of being a gamer. i am more than positive i was as annoying if not more annoying online. i had that freedom, so should they. its a part of culture to be rude just as its a part of our culture to be polite. without one you don't have the other. there are just as many rude, racist, sexist, homophobic biggots as there are online as there are in the real world and censoring either of them wont solve any problems. although i havent played wow in years now, theres always /report if you want to cry and have someone hold your hand.

  104. cry more by crabpeople · · Score: 1

    and grow up. How are you going to defend against trolls by crying to the gms? You arent. There will always be trolls. Dont give them attention and they disapear everytime. I hate that everyones such a fucking sissy on the internet these days. The bloggers, the wow players... If this is what it means to have the masses on the information superhighway, I say kick them off!

    --
    I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    1. Re:cry more by OS24Ever · · Score: 1

      Clearly you haven't been in the Barrens chat for the last two years. Or outland now for that matter.

      first thing you do when create an account is leave general, trade, looking for guild, and then you start getting spam mail in your mailbox and spam tells.

      I quit playing, it's just not worth the aggravation anymore. There is no 'ignore all tells but those on my friend list/in my guild' option or anything.

      --

      As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

  105. Here's why. by Zero_Independent · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The fact that niggers, homosexuals and females are inferior is pretty much universally accepted. Everybody seems to living in a fantasy world where everyone is accepting and tolerant of everyone no matter how disgusting, or inferior their lifestyle is.

    Surprise asshole, just because the government has legislated the bullshit that is tolerance doesn't mean that is an accurate depiction of society. Just because your neighbor won't admit in polite society that he hates niggers doesn't mean that he would welcome a black family moving in down the street.

    To all those whiners that bitch about the use of "gay" in online multiplayer games, get off your high horse. Nobody finds the free expression of ideas intolerable except for you.

  106. What is this madness? by Rhesusmonkey · · Score: 1

    So it's ok to kill, pillage etc, but naughty words make you cry? It's not game makers fault that Americans have raised a hateful breed of vitriol spewing spawn, so stop demanding censorship from on high, there's got to be a better way.

    --
    You need more psychedelic art in your life. rhesusmonkey.deviantart.com
  107. Re: spamsentry by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't even bother reporting the spammers with spamsentry. Blizzard has already stated that they are overwhelmed by reports from that mod and their logging (apparently) isn't good enough to track the culprits - who usually fire off a barrage of spam and then delete the account.


    Do you happen to have a reference for that? I wouldn't be suprised if their logging is that lackluster. Seems security is often an after-thought (and by then its really difficult to deal with).


    Better use of spamsentry is this: /spamsentry options ignorebylevel 2


    Thanks for the tip! Reporting spam was sort of loosing its novelty value anyway. :)
  108. chuck by darga · · Score: 1

    norris

  109. There is a solution: SpamSentry by extra+the+woos · · Score: 1

    Dude, just get SpamSentry. You can even have it completely ignore any tells from someone under, say lvl10, if you wish (I don't use this feature of it because I find I don't need it at all). It also does a great job just filtering spam. You can have it notify you when it blocks something, notify you hourly, or not notify you at all (which is what I use, I never even know!).

    --
    replacing it with NEW Folger's Crystals! (lets see if they notice the difference)
  110. ob Bash.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [Zybl0re] get up
    [Zybl0re] get on up
    [Zybl0re] get up
    [Zybl0re] get on up
    [phxl|paper] and DANCE
    * nmp3bot dances :D-
    * nmp3bot dances :D|-
    * nmp3bot dances :D/-
    [[SA]HatfulOfHollow] i'm going to become rich and famous after i invent a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet

  111. Re:Colleen by geminidomino · · Score: 1

    It's Fuckwad, not asshat.

    Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Total Fuckwad.

  112. Ain't no privacy here by JoelMartinez · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "... give permission ..." heh, that implies that they don't already have the ability to listen in on your tender "cyber" in a secluded room in stormwind

    1. Re:Ain't no privacy here by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      Of course, but do you really think they stop and read everything sent to every person in the game?

      Granted, if they're BOFHs, they'd probably have it search for specific terms for blackmailing purposes. :P

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  113. Private server. by allforcarrie · · Score: 1

    Thats why after 2 years i have turned off both of my accounts and went to a private server.

  114. How often does it work? by phorm · · Score: 1

    I've reported plenty if idiots back in the days that I played WC-III, and say them happily floating around being f**ktards without any consequence. Some of these people even managed to get names like ChinxSukBalls without getting banned by Blizzard.

    Blizzard does not care about game quality unless it prevents the amount of money they have rolling in. It's been this way since Starcraft.

    Perhaps what the games need is a player-rating system. If you have a guy who is rated as a jerk on a RTS, you can choose to exclude him from games. In the MMO's, have an interface to indicate how the guy is being a jerk, and with enough unique bad criteria block his account (or have it submitted for blocking).

  115. Wasn't sure where to post this suggestion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, a million people want to play a game at the time, right?

    Tier the servers.

    You set up a new account, you have access to all levels of the server. Grief too many people, you're only allowed on levels 2-7. Keep it up and you're banished to levels 3-7. Level 7 is a hell where there isn't even room for the word "the" among the obscenities. :)

    Of course you can choose to visit a lower tier any time you wish (to play with your obnoxious classmate for instance), you just can't visit higher tiers than the one you've earned.

    Also, you could have a level zero where people who have been playing level one for at least a couple of months with no problems could ascend to. (Also known as the "I just want to play." level.)

  116. Re: spamsentry by SEAL · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do you happen to have a reference for that?

    It was an employee posting on their forums but unfortunately I don't have a link. The post I'm remembering though, mentioned the problem being SpamSentry's queued-spam reporting. SpamSentry - by default, I think, queues up spams received and alerts you to them hourly. If you batch-report them to a GM at that point, the spammer is long-gone. That is: the character used to generate the spam has been deleted, so your report no longer helps Blizzard because apparently their logs don't correlate the character sending the spam-tells to the account name.

    If you send a report the instant the spam is received, there's a chance that a GM will see it in time to do something about it. Based on their customer-service response time though, it seems unlikely.

  117. stock shoes by kewenlong · · Score: 0

    welcome to our website: http://www.shoesmonger.com/ About our products,We have the following advantages: 1.High quality. All the shoes we offer are up to the Grade AAA. 2.Quick shipment. We have agreement with some International Express Corporation, the shoes will be shipped within 24 hours after we received your payment. And the parcel will reach your side in 5-7working days. 3.Lowest price. We can give you the best price based on equal conditions in China. 4.fast delivery, and guarantee on shipping.

  118. I've said before... by petrus4 · · Score: 1

    ...that having your character die while in the Wailing Caverns is actually a traumatic experience, because you are then abruptly thrust back out into the discordian maelstrom that is Barrens general chat. It's an experience that I've likened to suddenly and rapidly having your head plunged into a bucket of refrigerated vomit.

  119. Re: spamsentry by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

    Interesting. Race condition. Thanks for the tips!

  120. Don't get mad at the Spammer's Account by mixtape5 · · Score: 1

    The thing is that these spammers spam from legit accounts. They keylog people and create lvl 1 alts and spam. One of my friends got banned for this because some gold sellers were spamming from his account. I personally am stumped for a solution to the problem. (and the ignore/report thing on the account level could mess up a legit player!)

    --
    WoW: Scheod 70 orc warlock on Shadowmoon
    1. Re:Don't get mad at the Spammer's Account by Endareth · · Score: 1

      Actually this is not that common. It's quite difficult for them to get working keyloggers on peoples accounts due to how thorough Blizzard are at scanning running processes once you start to play. It's really not worth it to them, especially when they can simply either get a free trial account (with the limitations involved), or pay a few dollars for a legit account which they can usually spam from for quite some time before it gets noticed and killed off. While keyloggers for WoW are out there, they're more likely to result in all of the person's items and gold being stripped off, rather than being used to spam with. Of course, there's no reason they couldn't be spamming while they do it, but that'd be increasing the risk to them, so I wouldn't have thought it likely.

      --
      Disclaimer: The above comment was made while under the influence of too much coding and not enough sleep.
  121. Umm - there's still the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Each of the groups you mentioned have contributed rather well to that mix we call society (without the last group you wouldn't even be here spouting this trollish drivel).

    Here's the fun bit: various laws that try to help even the most bigoted idiot understand that we need to work together on this planet to make something make what you have just said in a public forum illegal. You seem to have trouble confusing freedom of speech with freedom to be an pathetic little idiot (aka troll) who obviously gets off on offending people to get a little bit of attention.

    The post is logged, your IP address is logged and there is thus a chance that you may get a visit from a not-so-friendly local police official.

    I think you deserve to be arrested by a colored lesbian cop. You will find out about a new right then: your Miranda rights.

  122. billg's response... by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

    If the video game industry wasn't an extended boys locker room where everything goes because there's no parents or teachers around? I worked for six years in the video game industry where such childish behavior was the norm. The supervisors called each other "douche bags". A woman lead tester was fired for calling a tester an "a**hole" for screwing off on her project, never mind that male testers routinely called each other "hos" and "bitches". Maybe it's time for the video game industry to clean up its act.
    that's the dumbest fucking idea I've heard since I've been at Microsoft.
  123. Agree and Disagree by ponderance · · Score: 1

    I played WoW for about a year. I must agree it is sad if you're getting called names and such 60 times an hour. You have to remember, as has been said several times I see, there are a LOT of early teens playing. Now, I did notice that going from a PVP to a Non-PVP server, the IQ seemed to increase dramatically. Which makes sense to me. Younger kids seem to forget how to act towards people when they're able to pretty much whipe out whole zones of the other faction, then run around trying to dual everyone in their own once the zone is clear of the opposition. The epenis/mighty pixel disease spreads quickly when world pvp gets hot for long periods of time, too.


    As far as freedom of speech goes -- I had a guild for many months where I made it clear that we allow profanity in guild. We had rules and guidelines that we adhered to that kept guild chat fun and weeded out people who joined just to cuss nonstop. It turned into a well known starters guild, and a safe harbor for people's alts to guarantee their alt building would be fun rather than OMG PVP/RAIDS ALL DAY ALL DAY ALL DAY. Some GMs knew about it and thought it was a good idea seeing how it was governed and how everyone was kindly informed before they ever got into the guild. (a GM had joined it on an alt I guess, especially after hearing there was profanity allowed just because they were curious to see how it worked without people ever complaining. He had some great dirty jokes.) I'm all for IQ tests for joining guilds ;)

    One addition I would like is an auto-ignore feature for non-guildies that blocks people who type u, r, y, etc. -grin-

  124. Level ignore? by splutty · · Score: 1

    Actually, I think what i have as a tell interceptor now works quite well. I can just ignore anything from everyone under level 6, which takes care of (for now) all the gold spammers.

    I wish Blizz would implement something along those lines, since the interceptor works through the who command, which isn't able to provide constant information.

    --
    Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
  125. WoW Has Solutions by Toad-san · · Score: 1

    The only place I go online that has interaction is World of Warcraft. That's right, no chat rooms, no Instant Messaging, no other games.

    WoW has always had Ignore, and I use it extensively. Someone's a jerk? One warning, and then that's the end of THAT conversation! (Or at least the jerk's side of it.) And that works for all channels, all situations, all circumstances. Oh, he's actually a poor misguided youth who simply needs help and guidance? Dot's nice, mon .. look to your therapist, fool.

    And now that I've found two Most Excellent add-ons (Spam Guard Plus and Spam Sentry), that takes care of the gold selling pukes (ptui, may they rot in hell) spamming on most channels and via whisper.

    I still, of course, report each and every single one of them, by name, to Blizzard. Because it's fundamentally Blizzard's fault that they exist and that they proliferate. There are easy fixes, and Blizzard (in search of the almighty dollar and an ever-growing customer base) refuses to take them. So I'll continue to bug them until hopefully (some day) they do something about it.

    But the spammers (and the morons) are no longer an issue to me. This is a non-problem. And certainly not the End Of Interactive Online Civilization As We Know It.

  126. It's not trash talk by Aexia · · Score: 1

    It's more akin to random people who are not playing constantly hurling abuse at players, getting in the way, stealing the ball, etc.

  127. I joined the online world to meet other players... by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

    But I realized they are all foul mouthed youngsters (what a shock) so I built this box and now I live in it.... Seriously people, what the hell do you expect? This is the internet.

  128. Second Life does it one better by Pliny · · Score: 1

    They send greifers to the Cornfield

    --
    What does this button d$#%* NO CARRIER
  129. Re:I joined the online world to meet other players by flybeway · · Score: 1

    i like it

    --
    welcome to http://www.funingame.com
  130. Re:Colleen by Maserati · · Score: 1

    Thank you, I didn't want to have to find that strip myself.

    --
    Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
  131. Crai More by HouseArrest420 · · Score: 1

    I can see how you all feel about behaviors of anonymous people on the net, I can admit that it does get out of hand at times. The issue I have with this type of complaint is that most of the poster's here have acted just like the people they're shaking fingers at. If you say you've never done it, 1. your either the pope or 2. your a bold faced liar. If your part of the problem you have no right to voice your opinions on a solution. They came up with a word for these types of people. Hypocrite.

    --
    This is Slashdot! Give me the latest gadget, bug, or OS project! This ain't english class so don't confuse the two!
  132. What solution? by anduz · · Score: 1

    I'm not a fan of trolling, but I certainly don't like the self-righteous community police either - and at least when both groups are around they keep eachother busy rather than going after me.

  133. Re:Colleen by Is0m0rph · · Score: 1

    Well that's a bad analogy. Since virtually every only game can mute people who annoy you. Some person starts harassing you you block them and never hear from them again.

  134. On Speech by Fifty+Points · · Score: 1

    We live in a world in which people are beheaded, imprisoned, demoted, and censured simply because they have opened their mouths, flapped their lips, and vibrated some air. Yes, those vibrations can make us feel sad or stupid or alienated. Tough shit. That's the price of admission to the marketplace of ideas. Hateful, blasphemous, prejudiced, vulgar, rude, or ignorant remarks are the music of a free society, and the relentless patter of idiots is how we know we're in one. When all the words in our public conversation are fair, good, and true, it's time to make a run for the fence.

    --Daniel Gilbert, the Harvard College Professor of Psychology at Harvard University.

    --
    I'm in between insightful sigs right now...
  135. We're going about this the wrong way. by IAmAUser · · Score: 1
    This problem is actually part of a bigger problem, the one of insufficient moderation. If we could solve this, not only would the swearing no longer be a problem, but hacking, scamming, etcetera, would all be history. There is really no other way to stop this, without getting rid of chat altogether. Swear filters? Use 1337, or misspell the word. There are thousands of spelling permutations of any given word, and no way to filter all of them. The only reasons these people don't swear their heads off in the real world is because they care more about their identity with real people, people who they actually know, and their actions have much greater repercussions. In real life, you can't make a new account.

    The chief problem is finding trustworthy people to do the moderation. My solution? Make it a hierarchy. Have the most trustworthy people in the company running the game each watch over a small group of people, spot check them every once in a while (to keep them from abusing power), and assign each moderator a specific location to watch. If the world is big enough, then those people might also watch subordinates instead of doing the patrolling themselves, and this could even get down to player moderation. As long as each person is fairly trustworthy, and as long as the untrustworthy people are weeded out quickly, this system should work. Theoretically.

  136. A real problem! by trimCoder · · Score: 1

    This article sums up why I quit WOW and havnt played another online game since. Its not necessarily the developers responsibility but it is a real issue.

    As a guild leader I could write an essay on the dramas that went on and unfortuneately it was not all from kids.

    I saw people belittle others it the most horricfic ways, people be in the guild for months acting as a different person to get revenge on another member. Even a con artist that had ripped off many players in real life (pretended to have a child, the child got sick and he needed to get money for the operation). Luckily we found out about that one before he finished his con but others werent as lucky.

    My point is that it is this lack of morality in online games that will the biggest barrier to its growth. Until there is some form of accountability in these games i will not be playing another hour.

  137. WOW? Pfft, try CS! by Unclescar · · Score: 1

    wow, for all it's drama and idiots will never ever compete with CS in it's day when you had nothing but loud-mouthed pre-pubescent morons screaming racists insults once every 5 seconds only to be joined by their entire clan of loud-mouthed pre-pubescent morons.

    --
    All science is either physics or stamp collecting.
  138. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turn on your language filter. Simple.