Jagex's chatwatch program automuting private messages/etc

[V O R K]

Well, considering that the program does something good, yes.

 

Considering the average runescape player is now 18+ are you sure?

Source needed and, why does it even matter so long as minors are playing the game?

 

 

Not too long ago I was prancing around in a zamorak outfit and saw a saradominist with a few of his friends at the GE. Jokingly I preach my book and before I know it I get a whole slew of curses thrown at me and that I shouldn't take this game so serious, he keeps ranting and ranting untill his brother returns which immediately takes action and starts apologizing to me and tells me he's a minor.

 

Moral of the story: kids are even worse and hiding and censoring doesn't change a thing. It's the attitude of the player, not a game filter.

 

I have fond memories of the wilderness fak u ghey nub u bser

 

so easy to get around filters.

[Noxx]

Jagex has now become fully Americanized. "We want to watch EVERYTHING you say or do."

[Ginger_Warrior]

Well, considering that the program does something good, yes.

 

Considering the average runescape player is now 18+ are you sure?

Source needed and, why does it even matter so long as minors are playing the game?

 

 

Not too long ago I was prancing around in a zamorak outfit and saw a saradominist with a few of his friends at the GE. Jokingly I preach my book and before I know it I get a whole slew of curses thrown at me and that I shouldn't take this game so serious, he keeps ranting and ranting untill his brother returns which immediately takes action and starts apologizing to me and tells me he's a minor.

 

Moral of the story: kids are even worse and hiding and censoring doesn't change a thing. It's the attitude of the player, not a game filter.

 

I have fond memories of the wilderness fak u ghey nub u bser

 

so easy to get around filters.

I don't see how that's at all relevant.

 

The counter argument to just about every thread on "policing" the Internet is that parents should be taking more responsibility for supervising what their children do or see on the Internet. Please, don't get me wrong; I fully agree with that argument. However, by removing the censor, you remove one of the precious few tools they could use to fulfill that role.

 

Which way do you want your toast buttered: do you want more hopelessly flawed attempts at Internet policing, or more measures which operate on a personal level like in-game chat filters?

[Ginger_Warrior]

You and I both know that's a meaningless threat.

[Viv]

I Got muted lol, and now I remember what it was for.

They should just leave it up to reports and stay the heck out of private chats.

[thejollyroger]

so easy to get around filters.

I don't see how that's at all relevant.

 

Why isn't it relevant? I mean, it is true: some will attempt to get around filters any way they can. We've probably got dozens upon hundreds of screenshots somewhere of censor evasion-- I know there's been a few sigs here as testament to that. Granted, I guess that's not sufficient proof to abandon filtering/censoring, but it does state that determined individuals will try to get around it.

 

The counter argument to just about every thread on "policing" the Internet is that parents should be taking more responsibility for supervising what their children do or see on the Internet. Please, don't get me wrong; I fully agree with that argument. However, by removing the censor, you remove one of the precious few tools they could use to fulfill that role.

 

Sure, I like to have a few tools handy to me as a parent, but I don't rely on them too heavily. I had a paragraph here explaining the technical details of what I do, but I decided to gloss over that in interest of space, for now. I'll say "blacklisting by .hosts file" and leave it at that. So my baseline argument remains the same: I will take some basic tools, but otherwise I'm going to work hard to discuss things with my kids.

 

Which way do you want your toast buttered: do you want more hopelessly flawed attempts at Internet policing, or more measures which operate on a personal level like in-game chat filters?

 

I should come clean about my bias. I really did a double-take when Mark Gerhard came on board, because he was under 25. I freely admit that I have a lot of trouble taking anyone under 30 too seriously (opposite of my parents' generational mantra- don't trust anyone over 30). How many Jagex staff are parents? Some of this filter business really reeks of miltiant helicopter-parenting moms to me. I had a very short stint on the Tip Crew sorting incoming messages and I really hated the ones that read something like "Dear Jagex, unban my son's account." (Some could have been forged, but... I doubt that was often the case.)

 

I know Jagex has written up a few articles addressed to parents, but I have difficulty taking any of it very seriously. They could use a major PR overhaul in that department, with clear boundary lines of where they stand, what they do... and what they will NOT do. They've been half-hearted about this for rather too long, IMO.

 

I've revised all this numerous times for length... if y'all decide you gotta ignore it all because it's not bite-sized, well... I tried. I wish some of the other parents (if they are still around) would say something.

[WhySoK0ed]

eh well i dont go bleeping in public in rs... i only bleep in pms to the people who can take it, like crude jokes :P

but i never swear in public on runescape, i keep a great rep and ive never gotten reported.

i dont agree whith this new rule of muting over pms, i think its okay to swear if noone gets offended.

[Erebea]

The homophobic F-word isn't acceptable not only because is it offensive, but most importantly because it's also directed against a specific group of people, not for any beliefs or values they have, but simply because they happen to be male and gay. The use of the term presumes the statement that: Homosexual men have a derogatory term used to describe them as a community, whereas heterosexual men do not. It also devalues the diversity within that community by removing the right to define one's own identity, and attempts to reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator: their sexuality.

 

You are quite a staunch prescriptivist. As Yoko Kurama stated, words mean different things in different context, and with different intention. Language is descriptive, not prescriptive; that is to say, if a cricle (in this case, his clan chat) agrees that a certain word (in this case the "homophobic F-word") means something that is not offensive, or is even meaningless, then it is fine. The circle has agreed on a definition for this word. You are merely forcing your definition of the word onto them, as Joe would be doing if he stubbornly chose to be offended. No, it does not matter what meaning the majority of society has put onto this word, whether it has history or not. The fact is, in this circle (the clan), it does not mean what you believe (and want) it to mean, so there is no problem. Old (kind of) convo, I know, but I just felt like getting that out there.

[iBe]

I used to be very careless with my language because the clan and community I had spent over a year with were all this way. As I grow older I see it as kind of unnecessary and rarely swear anymore. I don't mind these new rules being implemented because I won't really have to worry about it myself.

[Omali]

The homophobic F-word isn't acceptable not only because is it offensive, but most importantly because it's also directed against a specific group of people, not for any beliefs or values they have, but simply because they happen to be male and gay. The use of the term presumes the statement that: Homosexual men have a derogatory term used to describe them as a community, whereas heterosexual men do not. It also devalues the diversity within that community by removing the right to define one's own identity, and attempts to reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator: their sexuality.

 

You are quite a staunch prescriptivist. As Yoko Kurama stated, words mean different things in different context, and with different intention. Language is descriptive, not prescriptive; that is to say, if a cricle (in this case, his clan chat) agrees that a certain word (in this case the "homophobic F-word") means something that is not offensive, or is even meaningless, then it is fine. The circle has agreed on a definition for this word. You are merely forcing your definition of the word onto them, as Joe would be doing if he stubbornly chose to be offended. No, it does not matter what meaning the majority of society has put onto this word, whether it has history or not. The fact is, in this circle (the clan), it does not mean what you believe (and want) it to mean, so there is no problem. Old (kind of) convo, I know, but I just felt like getting that out there.

 

I've read this over a few times, and I'm still not convinced you are using this weak-ass justification seriously. The whole "oh I took this offensive word and made up my own definition" is crap because out of the one hundred seventy one thousand words in the English language (as per the 2nd edition of the Oxford Dictionary), you picked this one. You act like it's just some crazy coincidence, like the roulette wheel of language just happened to fall on that word by happenstance, a .000005% odds of happening, and I call BS on the whole thing. That word was cherry-picked because of its established meaning, because its simple use implies a blanket inferiority for whoever the person is talking about to fill just about any conversation. That's why you aren't calling someone a "blanket" and saying "no, I changed the definition, it's totally hateful now." You can claim all you want that your group has created a new definition, and you will be arguing through a screen door as everyone can see through it.

 

Your new definition is like a plant that was fertilized with the manure of the old definition, a manure that was hand-picked because it is so powerful. And no one (who isn't nosy) cares if you use it in the confines of your group, however you're going to get kicked off of someone's private property if they don't feel like tolerating your inside references, and everything about RuneScape from the servers to your account is Jagex's private property. When you are on their property, I'll have to ask you follow your own rule and not force your definition of a word on them.

[Quyneax]

I think you're being really unreasonable there, Omali. Erebea isn't pretending it's a roulette wheel, the OD may have 170k words but that says nothing, the word may have been picked because of its meaning originally but that means nothing, and blanket can be very offensive if used right.

 

It's possible for words to lose negative (and positive, and other) connotations, it happens all the time, and it can be quite fast as well. Certainly, there is a reason why and that has to do with the old meaning of the word, but the current meaning isn't the old meaning. Just because a word used to mean something doesn't mean that there is any trace of that left in current usage.

 

Basically you aren't even presenting any counter-argument, so I don't know why you bother to post.

[Platinum_Myr]

I think you're being really unreasonable there, Omali. Erebea isn't pretending it's a roulette wheel, the OD may have 170k words but that says nothing, the word may have been picked because of its meaning originally but that means nothing, and blanket can be very offensive if used right.

 

It's possible for words to lose negative (and positive, and other) connotations, it happens all the time, and it can be quite fast as well. Certainly, there is a reason why and that has to do with the old meaning of the word, but the current meaning isn't the old meaning. Just because a word used to mean something doesn't mean that there is any trace of that left in current usage.

 

Basically you aren't even presenting any counter-argument, so I don't know why you bother to post.

 

I disagree.

 

Word meanings can change. This clearly happens all the time. However, he has a point that the reason particular words are chosen and changed is because of their previous/old definition. We take a word and change it to an insult. The particular word that is picked usually has some particular reason or meaning for why we would pick that word. (ex, it is ironic, or sarcastic, or there is some inside joke, it sounds similar etc).

 

The reverse is also true. We might "say" that use of a word among friends doesn't have particular meaning, but the very reason we chose the word in the first place is because it has that meaning and while we may understand that we are doing something in a joking fashion, that doesn't mean ignoring the origins. I don't believe this is healthy practice, as there are better ways to communicate and express among friends. I don't particularly want to be friends with people who joke-insult each other all the time. But apparently many people (act like they) are ok with this.

 

Now, I don't necessarily believe that it means Jagex should censor (I believe they should filter optionally) but they have ownership and thus right to do what they want with their property.

[Erebea]

I've read this over a few times, and I'm still not convinced you are using this weak-ass justification seriously. The whole "oh I took this offensive word and made up my own definition" is crap because out of the one hundred seventy one thousand words in the English language (as per the 2nd edition of the Oxford Dictionary), you picked this one. You act like it's just some crazy coincidence, like the roulette wheel of language just happened to fall on that word by happenstance, a .000005% odds of happening, and I call BS on the whole thing.

 

I don't know what made you get that impression, but no, that is not what I mean. This is not a justification, it is an explanation of linguistics. I do not act as if it's some crazy coincidence, the person indeed chose that word, whatever reason they chose it for. The reason they chose it, however, does not matter, as the person made sure to remove the typical meaning of the word and use it as what is most likely an empty insult.

 

That word was cherry-picked because of its established meaning, because its simple use implies a blanket inferiority for whoever the person is talking about to fill just about any conversation. That's why you aren't calling someone a "blanket" and saying "no, I changed the definition, it's totally hateful now." You can claim all you want that your group has created a new definition, and you will be arguing through a screen door as everyone can see through it.

The word may have been cherry-picked because it was deemed offensive by the masses, but as I said that does not matter. You can call someone a blanket and make up an offensive definition for it, it's entirely possible if the circle agrees on it. You are again just assuming a certain word couldn't possibly be offensive just as you are assuming that a certain word couldn't possibly NOT be offensive. This is not as if they are making up a definition and telling every one to use it, they made a definition and proposed it to their circle (likely subconsciously) and by the look of how some clan chats are, they have agreed (likely subconsciously, again) on that definition. There really is nothing more to it.

 

Your new definition is like a plant that was fertilized with the manure of the old definition, a manure that was hand-picked because it is so powerful. And no one (who isn't nosy) cares if you use it in the confines of your group, however you're going to get kicked off of someone's private property if they don't feel like tolerating your inside references,

 

That's fine, if they do not agree with it and it is their property, then so be it. But if they do agree, then so be it; a clan chat is the property of it's owner and those with authority over it.

 

and everything about RuneScape from the servers to your account is Jagex's private property. When you are on their property, I'll have to ask you follow your own rule and not force your definition of a word on them.

 

While they do technically have every right to censor us, since it's their property, they also equally have the right to deal with the backlash of doing such things. One such backlash possibly ending in them losing tons and tons of money. They have the right to lose that money, and that is what will happen should they enforce such things (I'm not saying they are right now, by the way.) No one is forcing their definition on Jagex (Well, maybe except those moms), Jagex is forcing that definition on us.

[pulli23]

While they do technically have every right to censor us, since it's their property

 

This is untrue. Facebook just had to pay a fine of 250 000 euros for censoring accounts that were from news reporters reporting about homosexual sex behaviour.

 

 

They can only mute things that are reasonable; independent of whether they own or not own the medium. (Otherwise radio/television/internet at all broadcasts could also be censored as someone owns the ether & the antennas).

[Erebea]

While they do technically have every right to censor us, since it's their property

 

This is untrue. Facebook just had to pay a fine of 250 000 euros for censoring accounts that were from news reporters reporting about homosexual sex behaviour.

 

 

They can only mute things that are reasonable; independent of whether they own or not own the medium. (Otherwise radio/television/internet at all broadcasts could also be censored as someone owns the ether & the antennas).

 

Facebook is a social networking website -a very large one at that- RuneScape is a simple MMO. I do not think something that would work against Facebook would against Jagex. Facebook is any thing but private.

[Omali]

I don't know what made you get that impression, but no, that is not what I mean. This is not a justification, it is an explanation of linguistics. I do not act as if it's some crazy coincidence, the person indeed chose that word, whatever reason they chose it for. The reason they chose it, however, does not matter, as the person made sure to remove the typical meaning of the word and use it as what is most likely an empty insult.

 

It absolutely does matter, because you are trying to fix a new definition on an old world while at the same time acting all surprised and offended that people might find your choice of base word offensive.. I'll let Clerks 2 explain why that doesn't work:

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=b0R3OjMcOqg (very strong language)

 

The point, for people at work: "It can't be saved, Randal. The sole purpose for its creation, the only reason it exists in the first place is to disparage and entire race. And even if it could be saved, you can't save it.

 

The word may have been cherry-picked because it was deemed offensive by the masses, but as I said that does not matter. You can call someone a blanket and make up an offensive definition for it, it's entirely possible if the circle agrees on it. You are again just assuming a certain word couldn't possibly be offensive just as you are assuming that a certain word couldn't possibly NOT be offensive. This is not as if they are making up a definition and telling every one to use it, they made a definition and proposed it to their circle (likely subconsciously) and by the look of how some clan chats are, they have agreed (likely subconsciously, again) on that definition. There really is nothing more to it.

 

It doesn't "not matter" just because you say it doesn't. Also, I didn't say blanket couldn't be offensive, I said that this circle you talk about never chooses that word. They choose the one that disparages homosexuals, or the one that disparages [insert minority]. It is never an innocuous word turned offensive, it is always a racist/hateful word turned into another hateful word. And you are telling everyone to use it, because you say "no you aren't allowed to be offended because this is our definition and if you don't accept that you are incorrect."

 

George Carlin said it best: "A lot of people will say that a word's meaning changes because a lot of people are using it that way. Yea well I say a lot of people are really [bleep]ing stupid."

 

That's fine, if they do not agree with it and it is their property, then so be it. But if they do agree, then so be it; a clan chat is the property of it's owner and those with authority over it.

 

 

It's hard to use a clan chat when you're muted/banned from the game.

 

While they do technically have every right to censor us, since it's their property, they also equally have the right to deal with the backlash of doing such things. One such backlash possibly ending in them losing tons and tons of money. They have the right to lose that money, and that is what will happen should they enforce such things (I'm not saying they are right now, by the way.) No one is forcing their definition on Jagex (Well, maybe except those moms), Jagex is forcing that definition on us.

 

Not even close to "tons and tons." The number of people who would quit because Jagex won't allow them to use racist/homophobic phrases in any context or definition on their servers is slim, and frankly their departure will do nothing but good for the community.

 

 

This is untrue. Facebook just had to pay a fine of 250 000 euros for censoring accounts that were from news reporters reporting about homosexual sex behaviour.

 

 

They can only mute things that are reasonable; independent of whether they own or not own the medium. (Otherwise radio/television/internet at all broadcasts could also be censored as someone owns the ether & the antennas).

 

Facebook and Jagex are two separate entities with completely different rules and regulations.

[Fallstar]

Quite simply if I want to use a term that you would find offensive in private chat with a friend, that has a grand sum of nil to do with you. I find the fact that some people presume they can control the language I use more than a little arrogant.

 

The word 'f' that some people use to describe homosexual males is also a word for cigarettes, at least in the UK. If my friend says to me to wait a few minutes before starting the next floor because he's going for a [bleep], should he be muted? Obviously not, it's ludicrous. Since Jagex can't determine the context the word was used in, they should just leave well alone.

[iBe]

Quite simply if I want to use a term that you would find offensive in private chat with a friend, that has a grand sum of nil to do with you. I find the fact that some people presume they can control the language I use more than a little arrogant.

 

The word 'f' that some people use to describe homosexual males is also a word for cigarettes, at least in the UK. If my friend says to me to wait a few minutes before starting the next floor because he's going for a [bleep], should he be muted? Obviously not, it's ludicrous. Since Jagex can't determine the context the word was used in, they should just leave well alone.

 

That's a good example and I can't help but agree with you on this one. Although there are other words he could choose from, Jagex shouldn't force them upon us.

[Quyneax]

It is never an innocuous word turned offensive, it is always a racist/hateful word turned into another hateful word.

That is not true.

 

It can't be saved, Randal. The sole purpose for its creation, the only reason it exists in the first place is to disparage and entire race. And even if it could be saved, you can't save it.

Nothing can't eventually lose its meaning. Communication - including language - is different in every group, every combination of people, and it changes all the time. Standards in one group can't be applied in another.

 

People get upset when they can't judge people by their own standards, which leads to the kind of argument above: "it must always be insulting because it is insulting in my world, or I know it was insulting in the world of someone I identify with, at some point". Relativism is difficult, yes, but that's how language and politeness works.

 

If you want to present an argument, base it off the happiness of the people involved (which hopefully is comparable across politeness systems). Will this new automute program make people on the whole happier? I doubt it will have a net positive effect, because there are enough automutes which don't have any positive effect (because they don't prevent insults) and all automutes have a negative effect (that people can't talk anymore).

[Kaida23]

The word 'f' that some people use to describe homosexual males is also a word for cigarettes, at least in the UK. If my friend says to me to wait a few minutes before starting the next floor because he's going for a [bleep], should he be muted? Obviously not, it's ludicrous. Since Jagex can't determine the context the word was used in, they should just leave well alone.

 

Surely your friend is aware of the derogatory meaning that word has almost everywhere else. Is it really that hard to type "I'm going for a smoke" instead?

 

That said, I do agree that this whole thing is a bit heavy-handed on Jagex's part. Automuting for things said publicly I could get behind, but private messages? That's just ridiculous.

[pulli23]

Why do they even TRY to do anything in private messages? That's a private business otherwise they shouldn't call it "private".

[Erebea]

It absolutely does matter, because you are trying to fix a new definition on an old world while at the same time acting all surprised and offended that people might find your choice of base word offensive

What? I'm not acting surprised. You really are not listening to what I am saying.

 

It doesn't "not matter" just because you say it doesn't. Also, I didn't say blanket couldn't be offensive, I said that this circle you talk about never chooses that word. They choose the one that disparages homosexuals, or the one that disparages [insert minority]. It is never an innocuous word turned offensive, it is always a racist/hateful word turned into another hateful word. And you are telling everyone to use it, because you say "no you aren't allowed to be offended because this is our definition and if you don't accept that you are incorrect."

Sometimes they could. Many people in my "circle" use the word "pooplord." I thought I made it quite clear, or at least implied, that I do not find saying these things okay in public chat, only in your circle. Also, you are generalizing, somewhat like these "hateful people" you so clearly dislike.

 

George Carlin said it best: "A lot of people will say that a word's meaning changes because a lot of people are using it that way. Yea well I say a lot of people are really [bleep]ing stupid."

Why would you quote an ad hominem? Do you really think that helps your case in any way? If so, I'm sorry to inform you that it does the opposite. I doubt this "George Carlin" fellow had any real idea what he was talking about, and hope that he was not trying to be taken seriously.

 

It's hard to use a clan chat when you're muted/banned from the game.

Yes, that is one of the reasons why this is bad. You might be catching on.

 

Not even close to "tons and tons." The number of people who would quit because Jagex won't allow them to use racist/homophobic phrases in any context or definition on their servers is slim, and frankly their departure will do nothing but good for the community.

 

I think I'm done here. You have proven that you will not be moved by any of my reasoning no matter what, as evidence by your still prevalent insinuation that certain words are offensive and racist/homophobic no matter what despite the fact that I already disproved this. People who use words that you don't like away from the public do not contribute badly to the community, by the way.

[ilovecuttingyews]

Why do they even TRY to do anything in private messages? That's a private business otherwise they shouldn't call it "private".

I keep my private chat open for a number of reasons and I can tell you that I've been called all sorts of nasty things by random people via PM. It could be called 'direct chat' in the sense that it's not always private conversations between friends.

[pulli23]

I keep my private chat open for a number of reasons and I can tell you that I've been called all sorts of nasty things by random people via PM. It could be called 'direct chat' in the sense that it's not always private conversations between friends.

 

That is your problem, and you can easily fix it by either setting it to friends or adding the offenders to a blacklist. Really do we have to adapt the rules to a select few who have bad experiences? That is like how the US attacks each country for a select few terrorists. The worst thing one can do.

[Alg]

I can't even begin to list the things that are wrong with that :wall: