Discussion: Are we allowed to utilize sarcasm and/or satire?

[Steve]

I ask cause I'm reading a lot of it, but it's not getting moderated out. Well, in most cases, not. Which could simply be the result of inability to have eyes on every thread, which is absolutely understandable.

If not allowed, I'd like to also suggest those terms added to the Forum Rules as big fat no-no's, so that it is clear, and then when a person flags a post for it (either term), those posts actually get moderated.

Purpose? To keep it fair, among all the community.

[Wyatt]

My personal opinion regarding sarcasm and satire tends to depend on the context. If it is being used as a veiled attack against another poster then it is more likely to draw moderator attention. It is also worth noting that such things are not always readily apparent via text and the meaning can often be misconstrued which I would expect would cause staff to err on the side of under moderating.

That combined with the fact that there are players to whom english is not their native tongue and thus may have a separate challenge with sarcasm/satire poses another difficulty with a concrete ruling in this case. Ultimately I take it on a case by case basis and prefer to err on the side of under moderation for subtle nuances of tone in text based forums.

This is of course my opinion only and it no way represents a totality of the moderation team's viewpoint.

[Maecius]

At the moment, I'd suppose that sarcastic remarks are only really discouraged in the suggestions forums, and there largely as a reaction to those forums turning pretty combative and inflammatory over the summer -- sometimes in discussions between players and staff, sometimes in discussions between players and other players.

The increasingly hostile atmosphere in those forums is largely what led to the introduction of stricter forum rules for them. (The forum split was a separate, but nearly simultaneous, move made more for the sake of dev convenience and efficiency -- but discouraging combative back-and-forth also helps out the devs by making threads more readable for them.)

The stricter suggestions forum rules may be relaxed again after the month is over, if things have lightened up; but ideally people will use all of the forums to try and make the server and the community a better place for everyone. Not to put one another down.

Sarcasm and satire can be used to humorous effect, and that's generally fine; but people can also use them as weapons against their coplayers. As Wyatt says, they can be used to issue "veiled attacks." And, generally speaking, if anything's being used to make someone feel bad out of character, in game or on the forums, I tend to have an issue with it personally. It's not much of a "community" if people are hating on each other, after all.

Regarding moderator presence, we've kept the team fairly small because it was originally experimental, and because nobody wants to see the forums over-policed. But this also means that they can't have eyes everywhere and at all times, correct. They read the forums on their own, sure, but they also rely on forum users to make reports on posts they feel violate forum rules, which they investigate. If they agree with a report, they'll correct the issue; if they don't feel it's a violation, they'll usually close the report with polite feedback to the reporter on why they felt it was not a violation or why they will be taking no further action at this time, etc., etc.

Generally users are only encouraged to open reports on black-and-white rules violations. They can open reports on "gray area" violations, but I'd ask that they not be upset if their report is closed with no action taken. We're trying to maintain a careful balance between not actively enforcing the forum rules and "cracking down" on them. We want the happy medium in-between those two extremes.

To make a report on a post you feel is a violation, you click the little "!" at the bottom of the questionable post to open the report.

I don't personally think there's a reason to put "don't be sarcastic" in the rules. I think it would lead to over-policing, and usually sarcastic posts that are mean-spirited are already covered under general forum rules #2 and #3.

[Deathgrowl]

Yeah, sarcasm and satire have their places. My personal opinion is that they rather than help a conversation or discussion come to some kind of conclusion, they just increase hostility. You're not convincing the other side with sarcasm and mockery. All that it does is antagonise them.

But that doesn't mean I would ever want it moderated unless it's just flat out namecalling and insulting.

[Steve]

if they don't feel it's a violation, they'll usually close the report with polite feedback to the reporter on why they felt it was not a violation or why they will be taking no further action at this time, etc., etc.

Thank you for the response Mac. I would like to take the opportunity to pull this one bit out, because I think that if the above does happen, I do hope the mods make sure to give feedback. Which I personally know isn't happening (in some cases...and you and I have already talked privately about this).

@Wyatt: I agree with you, that context is everything, in interpretation. However, if sarcasm is used by one Player to address another Player's earlier comment, and the Player on the receiving end of this sarcastic comment finds it demeaning their comment, and then flags it, what happens then? Does you or the Mod Team then debate the validity of the second Player's opinion or response? Where does second guessing and subjective judgement in these cases, help or eventually, stop? Or is it more of a "key words" kinda review of what is flagged, and thus, attempts at objective reasoning here?

Anyway, in the new Suggestion thread, its pretty rampant. Back and forth, defending and challenging comments/points, snarky returns and sarcastic comments which, as DG points out, is down right antagonistic. It is rather easy to "read between the lines," even if a Player never directly addresses the other they are referring to in their sarcastic remark. Which in itself, is probably an action done because direct confrontation and/or rebuttal—which is arguable whether at all justified in a place like Suggestions, or anywhere on the Forums—is often a sure-fire means to get censored.

[Tsidkenu]

Steve, you've made some terrible suggestions before and I think this is the worst one yet.






/sarcasm+exaggeration=sarcaggeration?

[Steve]

Zing! Good one Tsidkenu! Well played.

[Storm Munin]

No Steve, we are not allowed to utilize sarcasm and/or satire.

/M

[Steve]

No Steve, we are not allowed to utilize sarcasm and/or satire.[/color]

/M

I guess we need to define "we," mate. Cause some of the We are still doing it!

Or some of the We are allowed to do it.

[Wyatt]

Going to go ahead and lock this as it seems to be turning into nothing more than a means to use sarcasm to make allegations of misconduct against the moderation staff. Feel free to take up any issues you have of abuse with the senior staff.